2026-02-10 Council PacketEdmonds City Council Agenda
February 10, 2026
Page 1
Agenda
Edmonds City Council
Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
ZOOM: HTTPS://ZOOM.US/J/95798484261 PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 MEETING ID: 957 9848 4261
FEBRUARY 10, 2026, 6:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
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. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
5. PRESENTATION
1. Mayor's Finance Update – (5 minutes)
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 attending via Zoom, raise a
virtual hand to be recognized. If using a phone to dial in, press *9 to raise a hand.
When prompted, press *6 to unmute.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. Written Public Comments
2. Appointment of Councilmembers to Council Committees for 2026
8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes
2. Approval of claim checks.
Edmonds City Council Agenda
February 10, 2026
Page 2
3. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
4. Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport Professional Services Agreement
Amendment No. 6
5. Revision to Section 17.95.090 of ECC – Commute Trip Reduction
6. Snohomish county ILA
7. Resolution Adopting the BID Recommendations
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Jacobs On Call Services Contract – Public Works and Utilities (10 minutes)
2. Action on Six-Month Moratorium on Permit Applications Within the Deer Creek Critical
Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) that Would Require Stormwater Management – Planning
and Development Services (30 minutes)
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
For disability accommodations, materials in alternate formats, accessibility information, or language interpretation/ translation needs, please
contact the City Clerk at 425-775-2525 at your earliest opportunity. Providing at least 72-hour notice will help ensure availability.
City Council Agenda Item 7.1
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Written Public Comments (First Reading)
DEPARTMENT:City Council Office
PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational
RECOMMENDATION:Acknowledge receipt of written public comments submitted through
the comment portal.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
Public comments submitted via the web portal are to be published in the agenda packet.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
All community comments submitted through the comment portal will be published in the agenda packet
in the following Regular Meeting. Included in this packet are all public comments submitted through the
portal from February 1 – Febuary 5, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Acknowledge receipt of written public comments submitted through the comment portal.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
0
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Online comments from February 1 – 5th, 2026
Item 7.1
Packet pg. 3/167
Edmonds City Council Public Comments – February 10, 2026 Meeting
Online Form 2026-02-02 10:32 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/3/2026 12:32:39 AM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
FirstName Anabel
LastName Hovig
Email vanabel@hotmail.com
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Affirming support for immigrants and support for our community
Comments
Dear Mayor and council members, First, I want to thank the mayor and chief of
police for posting a joint message regarding their shared values on the safety,
equity and just treatment of all citizens. This is a first step in reassuring the
public especailly immigrant commuities that our officials care. I think it is
important to also hear a united message from our council members. I identify
as latina (of Puerto Rican decent), I am a teacher in the Edmonds school
district, a former Edmonds diversity commisioner, and have lived in Edmonds
for over 23 years. For the first time in my life I am afraid. I am afraid that I will be
profiled and taken without properly verifying my status. This is what is
happening here and in other cities. I am afraid for other latinos being
kidnapped without due process. I dont think many would argue that we have
laws that need to be followed and that there are consequnces to being here
illegally. But this current adminsistration is operating with impunity and
wrecklessness. I understand that the ploice department has some limitations.
It is important to know where our public officials stand on this important issue.
I understand that council member Chris Eck is proposing a resolution affriming
support for immigrants and other people of color in our community. This is a
positive step in acknowledging that these fears are rooted in the present
nightmare many people in our community are exepriencing. This is not only a
political issue but a human rights issue. One thing that brings me hope is
seeing how much our community support is growing, organizing and watching.
I hope the resolution passes. I can't imagine any reasons why it should not.
Please vote to affirm your support for immigrants and others in our
community. Thank you Anabel Hovig
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21167921&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub
missions
Item 7.1
Packet pg. 4/167
Edmonds City Council Public Comments – February 10, 2026 Meeting
Online Form 2026-02-03 06:48 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/3/2026 8:48:50 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
FirstName MOLLY
LastName CORDELL
Email molly.cordell06@gmail.com
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Supporting Immigrant Community
Comments
I just wanted to comment in support of the resolution that affirms Edmonds'
commitment to protect our immigrant neighbors and community members.
No human is illegal on stolen land, and every person deserves to be treated
with dignity and respect, regardless of how they came to Edmonds. Thank you
for showing public support for those in our community being attacked.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21169299&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub
missions
Online Form 2026-02-03 07:02 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/3/2026 9:02:39 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
FirstName Sarah
LastName Sullivan
Email sullivansarah82@gmail.com
CityOfResidence EDMONDS
AgendaTopic Immigrant rights and policing
Comments
Will the City of Edmonds police protect all of its citizens from kidnapping? Will
they stand in between federal agents unless there is a judge signed warrant?
Will they actually protect people?
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectId=21169310&contextId=18452053&returnto=sub
missions
Item 7.1
Packet pg. 5/167
City Council Agenda Item 7.2
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Appointment of Councilmembers to Council Committees for 2026
(First Reading)
DEPARTMENT:City Council Office
PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Informational
RECOMMENDATION:Acknowledge the new committee assignments.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
Council President, Michelle Dotsch, has assigned each councilmember to one of three Council
Committees: Finance, Parks and Public Works (PPW), Public Safety-Planning-Human Services-Personnel
(PSPHSP)
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
Each year the newly elected Council President has the responsibility to appoint members of the City
Council to the three Council Committees: Finance, Parks and Public Works (PPW), Public Safety-
Planning-Human Services-Personnel (PSPHSP).
RECOMMENDATION:
Acknowledge the new committee assignments.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
0
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Committee Assignments for 2026
Item 7.2
Packet pg. 6/167
6
1
7
2026 COMMITTEES
1) FINANCE – Meets 3rd Tuesday, 1 – 2:30 pm, Council Office
Chair, Will Chen
Erika Barnett
2) PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS – Meets 3rd Tuesday, 3 – 4 pm,
Zoom
Chair, Vivian Olson
Chris Eck
3) PUBLIC SAFETY-PLANNING-HUMAN SERVICES-PERSONNEL
– Meets 3rd Tuesday, 4:30 – 5:30
Chair, Jenna Nand
Susan Paine
Item 7.2
Packet pg. 7/167
4
5
3
City Council Agenda Item 8.1
February 10, 2026 – Regular Meeting
TITLE:Approval of Council Meeting Minutes
DEPARTMENT:City Clerk
PRESENTER:Luke Lonie
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Approve meeting minutes of the February 3, 2026 City Council Regular
Meeting.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:N/A ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
N/A
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve meeting minutes of the February 3, 2026 City Council Regular Meeting.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2026-02-03 Council Minutes Draft
Item 8.1
Packet pg. 8/167
Edmonds City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 03, 2026
Page 1
Edmonds City Council
Regular Meeting
Action Minutes
February 03, 2026
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Michelle Dotsch, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Erika Barnett, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Luke Lonie, City Clerk
Mike DeLilla, City Engineer
Mike Clugston, Planning and
Development Director
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation
Engineer
Brian Tuley, Information Services
Director
1.CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00pm by Mayor Rosen in the
Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was
opened with the flag salute
2.LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Councilmember Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledgment.
3.ROLL CALL
City Clerk Lonie called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
5.PRESENTATION
1.Mayor's Finance Update
6.AUDIENCE COMMENTS
1. Diane Paul – Spoke against national rhetoric and enforcement that has happened locally in
regards to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
2. Sarah Chris – Spoke against national rhetoric regarding ICE and in support of the resolution
supporting immigrants.
3. Bob Brunette – Spoke against the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant and its
expansion within the city limits of Edmonds.
Item 8.1
Packet pg. 9/167
Edmonds City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 03, 2026
Page 2
4. Diana Nielsen – Spoke against national rhetoric regarding ICE, thanked Council for the
resolution supporting immigrants, and offered full support.
5. John Quast – Spoke against the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s expansion.
6. Laurie Dressler – Spoke against the the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s
expansion.
7. Steve Fisher – Spoke in regards to the group that is forming to speak out against the
Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant and its expansion.
8. Chelsea Rudd – Expressed concern with ICE and its activities in the area.
9. Peter Keenan – Spoke in favor of the Edmonds community and against the City of
Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s expansion.
10. Stephanie Maclachlan – Spoke against the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s
expansion in the city limits of Edmonds.
11. Steve Conroy – Spoke against the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s expansion
in the city limits of Edmonds.
12. Simone Bower – Expressed gratitude for the Mayor and Chief Dawkins’ statement regarding
ICE, but requested clarification on Edmonds Police response to ICE.
13. Kelly Haller – Spoke against ICE activity nationally, expressed concern for local immigrants,
and urged Council to take action to protect immigrants.
14. Leila Norako – Thanked the Mayor and Chief Dawkins for their proclamation, but urged the
City to take stronger action.
15. Sarah – Urged the City to take stronger action against ICE and to support the families affected
by ICE.
16. Ziggy – Spoke in favor of the resolution in support of immigrants and to align with Olympia in
its stance against ICE.
17. Rachel – Spoke against ICE’s national activities and expressed concern for local communities
threatened by ICE. Thanked Council for the resolution but urged them to take stronger action.
18. Tim – Spoke against the City of Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s expansion within
the city limits of Edmonds.
19. Nacy – Spoke in favor of the resolution in support of immigrants, but asked that Council take
stronger action.
20. Finis Tupper – Spoke against the origin of the resolution supporting immigrants. Asked that
Council focus on different issues.
21. Nadine – Spoke against the actions of ICE and asked that Council take stronger action.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED THAT COUNCIL ALLOT EACH MEMBER UP TO THREE MINUTES IN A
ROUND-ROBIN FASHION TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO AUDIENCE COMMENTS.
THE MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND OLSON DISSENTING.
Councilmembers provided comment in response to audience comment.
7.RECEIVED FOR FILING
1.WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
8.APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
1.APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Item 8.1
Packet pg. 10/167
Edmonds City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 03, 2026
Page 3
2.APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT.
9.COUNCIL BUSINESS
1.Revision to Section 17.95.090 of ECC – Commute Trip Reduction – Engineering (5 minutes)
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer, and Mike DeLilla, City Engineer, provided background into the
Commute Trip Reduction program and asked Council to adopt the ordinance at a future meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO ADVANCE THIS TO A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING FOR APPROVAL.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION SO THAT IT IS INSTEAD ON THE CONSENT
AGENDA AT A FUTURE MEETING.
THE AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2.Potential Moratorium on Permit Applications Within the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge
Area (CARA) – Planning and Development Services (30 minutes)
Mike Clugston, Planning and Development Director, and Mike DeLilla, City Engineer, provided
background on the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) and described the need for a
moratorium on permit applications within the CARA.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED THAT COUNCIL FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THAT
COUNCIL ADOPT THE PROPOSED SIX MONTH MORATORIUM, THE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS ESTABLISHING THE MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ANY PERMIT APPLICATIONS
WHICH WOULD REQUIRE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE DEER CREEK CRITICAL AQUIFER.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO POSTPONE THE MOTION TO THE FEBRUARY 10, 2026 REGULAR
MEETING FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO MAKE COMMENT.
THE MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER NAND DISSENTING.
3.Snohomish County Technical Services Internal Local Agreement – Mayor's Office (10 minutes)
Brian Tuley, Information Services Director, provided background into an Interlocal Agreement with
Snohomish County regarding technical and geographic information systems (GIS) services.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO PLACE THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA
FOR THE NEXT FULL COUNCIL MEETING.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4.Resolution: Affirming the rights of immigrants and rights of all residents. – City Council Office
(10 minutes)
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1584, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AFFIRMING SUPPORT FOR IMMIGRANTS AND THE RIGHTS OF
ALL RESIDENTS, AND ENDORSING STATE LAWS THAT PROMOTE SAFETY AND EQUALITY.
Item 8.1
Packet pg. 11/167
Edmonds City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
February 03, 2026
Page 4
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 9:15 PM.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION CARRIED WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT DOTSCH ABSTAINING.
10.COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmembers commented on various issues.
11.MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen provided comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 pm.
Item 8.1
Packet pg. 12/167
City Council Agenda Item 8.2
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Approval of claim checks. (First Reading)
DEPARTMENT:Finance
PRESENTER:Richard Gould
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Approval of claim checks.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:$383,293.88 ☒ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):various ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☐ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
Approval of claim checks #280391 through #280492 dated February 4, 2026 for $383,293.88 and re-
issued checks #280493 through #280494 dated February 4, 2026 for $33,942.79.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
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.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of claim checks.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
$383,293.88
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment #1 – Claim checks dated February 4, 2026
Attachment #2 – Re-issued checks dated February 4, 2026
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 13/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 14/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 15/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 16/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 17/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 18/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 19/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 20/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 21/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 22/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 23/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 24/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 25/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 26/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 27/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 28/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 29/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 30/167
Item 8.2
Packet pg. 31/167
City Council Agenda Item 8.3
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire (First
Reading)
DEPARTMENT:Finance
PRESENTER:Richard
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
payments
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:1,516,983.81 ☒ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):various ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☐ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
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.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
Approval of payroll check #66377 dated February 5, 2026, for $2,947.38, direct deposit for
$832,178.54, benefit checks #66378 through #66383 and wire payments of $681,857.89 for the pay
period of January 16, 2026 through January 31, 2026.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments
BUDGET IMPACTS:
$1,516,983.81
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment #1 – 1-16-2026 to 01-31-2026 Payroll Earnings Report
Attachment #2 – 1-16-2026 to 01-31-2026 Benefit Checks Summary Report
Item 8.3
Packet pg. 32/167
Item 8.3
Packet pg. 33/167
Item 8.3
Packet pg. 34/167
Item 8.3
Packet pg. 35/167
Item 8.3
Packet pg. 36/167
City Council Agenda Item 8.4
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport Professional Services
Agreement Amendment No. 6
DEPARTMENT:Public Works and Utilities
PRESENTER:Andy Rheaume, Public Works and Utilities Director
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:I move the City Council authorizes the Mayor to sign Amendment No.
6 to the Wastewater Treatment, Disposal, and Transport Professional
Services Agreement.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:No funds required ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):Sewer Utility ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
The Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport Professional Services Agreement is expiring on
February 17, 2026. The proposed and attached Amendment No. 6 to the agreement will extend the
agreement for two additional years.
The agreement is for Edmonds to own and operate the Regional Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant and for
partnering agencies to contribute financially to operating and capital costs of the plant that they rely on for
wastewater treatment and disposal.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
In 1988 the City of Mountlake Terrace, Olympic View Water and Sewer District, Ronald Sewer District,
and the City of Edmonds entered into a 30-year Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport
Professional Services Agreement in which the parties agreed to contribute to and partner on the
Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant. Edmonds is the owner and operator of the plant.
Since 2018 the parties have amended the agreement every two years to extend the expiration date. The
proposed Ammendment 6 to the agreement extends the agreement to 2028. All parties have taken the
amendment to their respective boards/councils for consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
I move the City Council authorizes the Mayor to sign Amendment No. 6 to the Wastewater Treatment,
Disposal, and Transport Professional Services Agreement.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
No budget impact
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 37/167
ATTACHMENTS:
2026 Addendum 6 to Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport Professional Services Agreement
1988 Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport Professional Services Agreement
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 38/167
ADDENDUM NO. 6 TO AGREEMENT
Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport
Page 1 of 2
WHEREAS, the City of Mountlake Terrace, Olympic View Water and Sewer District, and
the Ronald Sewer District (the “Participants”) and the City of Edmonds (the “City”), (collectively
the “Parties”), all municipal corporations of the State of Washington, entered into a Professional
Services Agreement for Wastewater Treatment, Disposal, and Transport (“Agreement”), for a term
of thirty (30) years, from May 17, 1988 to May 17, 2018; and
WHEREAS, in May 2017, the Parties entered into an Addendum to the Agreement to
extend the term of the Agreement for two (2) years, through May 17, 2020, to allow time for issues
between the Parties to be resolved; and
WHEREAS, in April 2020, the Parties entered into Addendum No. 2 to the Agreement to
extend the term of the Agreement for an additional three (3) months, through August 17, 2020, to
allow additional time for issues between the Parties to be resolved; and
WHEREAS, in August 2020, the Parties entered into Addendum No. 3 to the Agreement
to extend the term of the Agreement for an additional eighteen (18) months, through February 17,
2022, to allow additional time for issues between the Parties to be resolved; and
WHEREAS, on April 30, 2021, pursuant to chapter 35.13A RCW, the City of Shoreline
assumed full and complete management and control of the Ronald Wastewater District (formerly
Ronald Sewer District); and
WHEREAS, the City of Mountlake Terrace, Olympic View Sewer and Water District, and
the City of Edmonds recognized the City of Shoreline’s assumption and its acceptance of the
contractual obligations previously agreed to by the Ronald Wastewater District and desired to
amend the Agreement to reflect this assumption; and
WHEREAS, in March 2022, the Parties entered into Addendum No. 4 to the Agreement
to document the City of Shoreline’s assumptions of all rights, responsibilities, and obligations of
the Ronald Wastewater District under the Agreement and to extend the term of the Agreement for
an additional twenty-four (24) months, through February 17, 2024, to allow additional time for
issues between the Parties to be resolved; and
WHEREAS, in March 2024, the Parties entered into Addendum No. 5 to the Agreement
to further extend the term of the Agreement for an additional twenty-four (24) months, through
February 17, 2026 to allow additional time for issues between the Parties to be resolved;
WHEREAS, in Addendum No. 5, the parties noted as follows: The Clean Water Act and
federal rules require wastewater treatment plants that contribute to water quality impairments by
discharging excess nutrients to take action to prevent this pollution. The Washington State
Department of Ecology Puget Sound Nutrient General Permit, effective January 1, 2022, applies
to the Edmonds WWTP since it discharges to marine and estuarine waters of Washington.
Monitoring of the operations of the Edmonds WWTP is necessary to determine what capital or
operational changes may be required to ensure compliance with the Puget Sound Nutrient General
Permit.
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 39/167
ADDENDUM NO. 6 TO AGREEMENT
Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Transport
Page 2 of 2
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and among
the Parties hereto as follows:
1. The Agreement of May 17, 1988, among the Parties, the terms of which have been
amended on five (5) previous occasions, is further amended in, but only in, the following
respect:
1.1 Term of Agreement: To extend this Agreement to February 17, 2028.
2. In all other respects, the underlying Agreement among the Parties and all addenda
thereto, shall remain in full force and effect and unchanged.
DATED this _________ day of _______________________ 2026.
CITY OF EDMONDS CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE
By:
Mike Rosen, Mayor Title:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
By:
Luke Lonie, City Clerk Title:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Office of the City Attorney Title:
OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND CITY OF SHORELINE
SEWER DISTRICT
By: By:
Title: Title:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
By: By:
Title: Title:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: By:
Title: Title:
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 40/167
AGREEMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREA'IMEN'l', DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORI' SERVICES
By and Airong
THE CITY OF EDMONDS
THE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE
OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
AND
RONALD SEWER DISTRicr
May 17, 1988
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 41/167
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Section 5
Section 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Definitions
Management of the Project
Financing of the Project
3.1 Cost of the Project
3.2 Allocation of Project Costs
and Plant Capacity
3.3 Grant Funding
3.4 Payment of the Participant's
Share of Project Costs
3.5 Bond Issuance
Upgrading or Expanding the Facilities
Sewage Treatment
5.1 Availability of Capacity
5.2 Capacity Limit
5.3 Notification of Nearing Capacity Limit
5. 4 Transfer of Capacity
5. 4.1 Cost of Capacity Transfer
3
9
9
9
10
11
11
12
13
13
13
14
15
15
16
5.4.2 Alternative Costs of Capacity Transfer 16
5.4.3 Sharing in Capacity Transfers 17
5.4.4 Temporary Capacity Transfer 17
5. 5 Treatrrent of Dones tic Sevsge Only 17
5.6 Sewage Quality 18
5.7 Pre-Treatment Ordinances
Operation, Treatment and Quality of the
18
19
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 42/167
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9
Facili tics <md tJ1e Participant's
Internal Sysi~em
6.1 Operation and Mainteno.nce
of the Facilities
6.2 Reporting Requirements
6.3 The Participant's Internal System
6.4 Ballinger Lift Station and Related
Facilities
19
20
21
23
6.5 Joint Use of Collection Systems Owned by One 25
Party.
6.6 Charges and Procedures Related to Joint 25
Sewerage Areas of Olympic View Water and
Sewer District and the City of Ed:rronds
Payment for Maintenance, Operation, and Overhead 26
Costs for the Treat:rrent of Dorrestic Sewage
7.1 Monthly Payments 26
7.2 Overhead Costs 27
7.3 Standby Maintenance Charge 28
7.4 Facilities Capital Improvements Fund 29
7.5 Participant's Rates and Sources of Payment 30
7.6 City Rates 31
7.7 Books and Accounts 31
OVersight Committee
8.1 Establishment of OVersight Committee
8.2 Oversight of Construction
8.3 Oversight of Operations and Maintenance
Replacerrent Standards; InsurancB
31
31
32
32
... :33
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 43/167
Section 10
Section 11
Section 12
Section 13
Section 14
Section 15
Section 16
Section 17
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Exhibit G
9.1 ReplilCCJ.~n t and Rc~habilitation :u
Stilndards
9.2 Insurilnce 33
Arbitration 34
Successors and Assigns 34
Amendment or Modification 34
Governing Laws 35
Nt:nnber and Gender 35
Notice 35
Term 36
Merrorandum of Understanding 36
Allocated Capacity and Percentage Shares 38
Operations and Maintenance Costs --Direct 39
Operations and Maintenance Costs --OVerhead 39
r--1errorandum of Understanding
Equivalent Customer Units Parameters
Methodology for Cost Computation Related
Capacity Transfer
Service Area Map for 1988
Preliminary Project Cos_t Estirrates
40
45
46
47
48
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 44/167
AGREEMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREA'.IME,-wr', DISPOSAL, AND TRANSPORT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is effective as of the 17th day of May, 19 88, by
and arrong the City of ~untlake Terrace, Olympic View Water and Se~r
District, and Ronald Sewer District (the "Participants"), and the CITY
OF E[M)NDS (the "City") (collectively, the "Parties11 ), all municipal
coqDrations of the State of Washington.
WHEREAS, the City's wastewater treatment and disposal facilities
(the "Facilities") are being upg-raded to meet the discharge limitations
of the City's current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
· waste discharge r;ermi t; and I
WHEREAS, the City must improve the Facilities so that they will be
in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and
regulations; and
WHEREAS, the State of Washington has enforced both Federal and
State statutes and in 19 85 issued a Compliance Order and a Compliance
Schedule to the City for the construction of secondary treatment
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to expand the capacity of the Facilities
at the 2nd Avenue and Dayton Street site in order to meet current
domestic wastewater treatrrt;nt nee~ of ypriOt1§ pul:>lic(2nti:ties locatE:(1
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 45/167
ln or near the City (collectively, the "Participants") and to provide
projected ultimate treatrrent capacity for the City and the Participants
as defined under "Allocated Capacity;" and
WHEREAS, the Participants wish the City to asswne the ownership
and o~ration of certain transmission, metering, and pumping
facilities, which are used jointly by some or all of the Participants
and the City; and
WHEREAS, the Participant is one of several Participants served by
the Facilities, and the Participant is to equitably share in the
financing of the necessary improvements to the Facilities provided that
the City reserves a portion of the capacity of the improved Facilities
for the treatment of domestic wastewater from the Participant's service
area; and
WHEREAS, The City desires to plan and provide for the long-term
capital and o~rational needs of the Facilities, which may include
mandated technological and regulatory changes and increased capacity
and space dernands; and
WHEREAS the Participants desire to be kept informed prior to and
during the construction of improvements; to provide for a method of
overseeing construction, o~ration, maintenance, and exp:msion of the
facilities; and to provide a procedure for reviewing and commenting
upon the Treatment Plant annual budgets; and
-2 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 46/167
WHEREAS, the City and the Part.icipanb:; dc:::are to provide for an
integrated Industrial Pretreabnent program within their respective
service areas as required by OOE and/or EPJ\; and
WHEREAS, The City and the Participants executed a Me.rrorandum of
Understanding in 1987 setting forth a number of principles and
expressing their intent to enter into this Agreerrent;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual
promises provided for herein, the Parties hereto for themselves, their
assigns and successors in interest, agree as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Agreerrent,
the following words shall have the following meanings unless another
rreaning is clearly intended:
1.1. "MDF" means annual average daily flow, and shall mean
the total flow of domestic sewage in millions of gallons during a full
calendar year divided by the number of days in such year, expressed in
.MGD.
1. 2. "Allocated Capacity of Dorrestic Sewage" means the
rraximum annual average daily flow (AADF) of Dorrestic Sewage that the
Participant is authorized by this Agreerrent to transmit to the
Facilities, measured in voll..lln2. Volume shall be measured by metered
Domestic Sewage flow expressed in M:;Ds of MDF. A substitute for
<:lirect m~tering is to be used where co-l11inglec1 flows for sma.ll
- 3 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 47/167
numbers of users (under upproxirnatcly 100 ECU 1 s) descrilx!d in Section
6.5 make direct rneusurcmcnt impractical.
1.3. "Capacity Limit" neans the preceding 12 TIDnth AADF
of any Party when it equals the Party 1 s Allocated Capacity of Donestic
Sewage.
1.4. "City" neans the City of Edmonds or its successor.
1.5. "Customer" means a "single family residence" and/or an
"equivalent custorrer unit" (ECU), as defined below.
1. 6. "OOE" rreans the Washington State Department of
Ecology, or its successor.
1. 7. "Danestic Sewage" neans sanitary wastes normally
collected from residential establishments, and shall include commercial
and industrial wastes of similar strength or quality, and other
commercial and/or industrial wastes that are pre-treated in accordance
with City and/or Participant requirenents meeting OOE and EPA
guidelines. Dorrestic Sewage shall exclude ground water, storm water,
drain water and industrial wastes not pre-treated in accordance with
City and/Participant requirenents meeting DOE and EPA guidelines.
1.8. "EPA" rreans the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, or its successor.
-4 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 48/167
1.9. "Equivalent Custorrer" Unit or "EL1J" is il n-cilsurc
applied to a user of the sewerage system other than "c;inglc family
residence." The numl:er of Equivalent Custorrer Units ilssigncd to any
such user (for example, an apartrrent house, motel, school, hospital,
nursing hane, and any other public or ca:tlrTercial establishrrent) shall
be the nurrerical ratio of the m::mthly volume of wastewater contributed
by such user to the m::mthly volurre of wastewater contributed by a
typical sillgle family residence. To serve as a practicable basis for
computing the number of ECU's contributing into the joint sewerage
system --when and if such a computation is necessary or desirable to
either augment or replace a direct flow measurerrent a list of users
and the corresponding "equivalent custorrer" ratings is attached in
Exhibit D, and incorporated herein by reference.
1.10. "Facilities" rreans the City's wastewater treatrrent
facilities as described in the City of Edmonds Engineering Report,
dated September, 1986, as arrended, and includes the effluent
transmission pipe used by all Participants (Edrronds Way Trunk) , the
outfall, the diffuser, and, upon the completion of the Project, the
Irrproverrents.
1.11. "Flow" rreans the volurre of sewage per unit of time.
1.12. "Improverrents" means those improverrents to the
Facilities described in the City of Edmonds Facilities Plan, dated
January, 1988, as arrended, or engineering plans and specifications
approved by OOE, EPA, and the City, all of which are incorporated
. __ herein by this_ reference,_ and approved. chang~ .. Q:p:lers _.Qa.IT iecl .9l1t __ i!l_ __
- 5 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 49/167
accordance with the construction of the facilities rcquirQcl under t:hi_s
Agreenent.
1.13. "Influent Point" means the point at which each
Participant's Internal System connects to the Facilities.
1.14. "Internal System" rreans all sewer lines, pump stations
and other sewer facilities upstream from the Influent Point owned and
operated by each Participant, respectively.
1.15. "MGD" rreans million gallons per day, referring to a
rate of sewage flow.
1. 16. "Maintenance and Operation Costs" rreans all direct
costs and expenses incurred by the City in transp:>rting and treating
Domestic Sewage through the Facilities, maintaining those Facilities,
and administering a joint Industrial Pre-Treatment program.
Maintenance and Operation costs are described in Exhibit B, attached
hereto and incorp:>rated herein by this reference .
1.17. "Merrorandum of Understanding" rreans the agreenent of
that narre between the City and the Participants executed in September,
October and November, 1987, attached as Exhibit C and incorp:>rated
herein by reference.
1.18. "M:::mthly Maximum Flow" means the total flow of sewage
in millions of gal1onsdivided by tb~_to_t9l.rn.Irt~:r ():f days in that
- 6 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 50/167
rronth during which the greatest volume of flow occurs, in any given
calendar year, and is expressed in MGD.
1.19. "NPDES Permit" means a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination Permit" granted to the City or to the Participant, as
applicable, pursuant to chapter 90.48 RCW and the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as arrended.
1.20. "Other Facilities" means facilities other than the
Treatment Plant, the outfall and diffuser, and the Edrronds Way Trunk,
which are used by the City and one or rrore Participants to transmit,
rneasure , and pump sewage .
1 . 21. "Overhead Costs" means the City's general
administrative, supervisory, and other indirect costs related to the
operation and maintenance of the Facilities and Other Facilities.
Overhead Costs shall be cc:mputed by the "step down" method. Overhead
costs are described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by reference
incorporated herein.
1. 22. "Oversight Ccmnittee" means the committee of that narre
established in Section 8 of this Agreement.
1.23. "Parties" rceans the City and the Participants.
1.24. "Participant's Jurisdiction" rneans the service area
- 7 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 51/167
collection services, depicted on Exhibit F, aU:ached hc:reto and by this
reference incorporated herein.
1.25. "Project" means the Improvements and activities needed
to implerrent it.
1.26. "Project Cost" means (1) the cost of preparing the
planning studies and engineering plans and specifications for the
Improvements; (2) the amounts paid to contractors for work performed
under contracts for construction, installation and inspection of the
Improvernents; (3) the recorded pay and expenses of employees of the
City directly related to the design, construction, installation and
inspection of the Improvements, but not including any general City
overhead; (4) the cost of materials, equipment and supplies directly
related to the Improvements; (5) the cost of acquiring and condemning
land, easements and rights-of-way for or related to the Improvements;
(6) the cost of legal, engineering and other professional services
related to the financing, planning, acquisition, construction,
installation and inspection of the Improvements and to the resolving of
any disputes or lawsuits related thereto, provided, however, that these
costs are attributed to the project as a whole and not to the City's
separate share; (7) the cost of obtaining necessary permits and
franchises' (8) the cost of any reasonable expenses incurred by the
City to mitigate the impact of the Facilities at the Dayton Street site
upon the imrrediately surrounding neighl:::orhood, including but not
limited to expenses for landscaping, buffering, limited concealment of
_secondary clarifiers and s:tree:t interfaces; (9) the cost of vacant land
- 8 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 52/167
purchased by the City in 1984 for exptm.sion of the secondary treatment
plant--a sum of $137,462.06; and (10) ot-her costs reasonably reJatc;d
to the planning, design, project administration, construction
management, and general project management for the Jnprovements.
1. 27. "Single Family Residence" means one structure, all
connected and under the same roof, located on a lot or tract of real
property having a separate and individual property description, with no
other structure used for human occupancy located on that tract or lot,
and which structure is used as a single family dwelling.
Section 2. Management of the Project. The City shall, to the
best of its ability, administer the planning, design, acquisition,
construction and construction management of the Improvements and pay
for the Project Cost thereof in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement. The City shall use its best efforts to obtain penni ts and
approvals necessary for construction, installation and inspection of
the Improvements, and to secure grants from available sources.
Section 3. Financing of the Project.
3. 1. Cost of the Project. The approximate Project Cost
is estimated to be $39,500,000 . The exact cost of the Project will
be determined by the City, acting reasonably, after construction,
installation and acceptance of the Improvements. Should all bids or
the contract price plus the total amount of all change orders exceed
the -estimated--Project Cost 1 a bid award-or--any change-order causllig the -------
- 9 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 53/167
estimated Project Cost to be exceeded shall b:~ vot~cd on by the Council
of the City only after meaningful consultation with the legislative
authority of each Participant, at a joint meeting to be called by the
City.
The City has entered into a Design Grant Agreement with the State
for a maximum of $1.5 million. The City also expects to receive a
grant and/or loan from either the State or the Federal Government in an
am::mnt equal to approximately 50% of eligible costs as defined by the
resr:;ective programs. The City shall use its best efforts to obtain
these grants. Interest earnings the City is r:;ermitted to retain on
grant and loan proceeds shall be applied to the Project Cost and shall
be treated as grant proceeds for the purpose of this Agreement.
3. 2. Allocation of Project Cost and Plant Capacity.
Part of the Project Cost may be financed from grants and/ or loans. The
remaining Project Cost shall be paid for by the City and the
Participants in the proportionate shares of their respective Allocated
Capacities of Domestic Sewage as follows:
Allocated
Capacity
Of wrrestic Project Cost
Party Sewage (MDF) Contribution %
Edmonds* 4.609 M;D 50.787%
Mountlake Terrace 2.103 MGD 23.174%
Olympic View Water District 1.502 MGD 16.551%
Ronald Sev.Br District 0.861 MGD 9.488%
-10 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 54/167
TOTAL: 9.075 100.000%
* Edrronds share includes separately contracted capacity for
approximately 70 connections in the Town of Woodway, and separately
contracted capacity for approximately 200 connections for Lynnwood.
3. 3. Grant Funding. The total anount of grant and/ or
loan proceeds, including any earned interest, available for the
Project, whether received in a lump sum or in installrrents over a
r::eriod. of time, or through a reduced interest rate loan program, shall
be applied toward the reduction of the total Project Cost to be
allocated among the Participants as described above.
3. 4. Payrrent of the Participant's Share of Project
Costs. Corrtrrencing November 2, 1987, each Participant shall pay to the
City its proportionate share of previous eligible Project Costs paid by
the City. Subsequently, the City shall sul::mit to each Participant
monthly invoices for eligible Project Cost and each Participant shall
ITBke every effort to make expeditious pa:yrrent on the next available
disburserrent cycle. . Docu:rrentation provided by the City in support of
the preliminary Project Cost amounts shall be similar to docu:rrentation
required for grant reimbursement. In the event that a Participant's
payment is received more than 45 days after receipt of City's bill, the
City shall be entitled to a late pa:yrrent surcharge equal to the
interest which the payment would have earned for the r::eriod in excess
-11-
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 55/167
of 45 days, based on an interest rate typically used for municipal
investing purposes.
The Participant shall have the option to pay the balance of
its share of the Project Costs in one lump sum on or before the date of
the City's issuance of revenue bonds or notes (whichever occurs first),
or in monthly pa.yrrents during the design, construction and installation
of the Improverrents pursuant to monthly invoices of the City. The
Participant's lump sum payment shall be by check, draft or wire
transfer in irrm2diatel y available funds and shall be placed in an
escrow account and withdrawn at such tines and in such amounts as are
determined by the City to be necessary to meet the obligations of the
contract for construction and installation of the Improvements. All
interest accumulated in an escrow account established in the City
Treasury for each Participant shall be returned to the Participant or
at the Participant's direction shall be applied to Participant's share
of the Project Cost. If the Project Cost exceeds or is less than the
estimate set forth in Section 3.1, the City shall at reasonable times
and upon reasonable notice in writing assess or refund to the
Participant for its share of that difference, and the Participant shall
pay those assessments, if any, subject to the provisions of Section 3.1.
3 . 5. Bond Issuance. The City and each Participant each
retain its rights to issue bonds and other obligations in accordance
with applicable law, but shall not act in such a manner as to impair
the rights of the holders or owners of bonds issued by any other Party.
-12 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 56/167
Section 4. .QEg:rading or l~~t_n_cii_l1_g:__~=!~~-_xacili t.ies. 1 f U1e
City is further required by applicable laws or regulations to upgrade
or expand the Facilities to provide a higher level of wastewater
treabrent or to m:Xlify the methods and/or locations of was·tewater
discharge, each Participant shall, if it desires to continue
discharging Domestic Sewage into the Facilities, pay the Participant's
proportionate share as set forth above of the cost of constructing such
additional improvements and/or adding needed equipment, and acquiring
land, whether by purchase or lease • The City may require the
Participant to make payments on the same .basis as the Project Costs.
The City and each Participant shall seek opportunities to minimize or
avoid the cost of additional improvrnents U1rough mutually agreeable
modifications in the quantity and quality of Domestic Sewage discharge
· by the Participant. In lieu of paying for its share of the cost of
constructing such additional improvements, any Participant may at its
discretion discontinue discharge of Domestic Sewage into the
Facilities, and then pay only those charges described in 7. 3 of this
Agreement.
Section 5. Sewage Treatment.
5. 1. Availability of Capacity. Until approximately April,
1991, when the City is scheduled to complete the Improvements, the City
shall receive, transport and treat by means of the existing Facilities
the domestic sewage discharged by each Participant up to the limits
permitted by EPA and DOE. Upon completion of the Improvements, the
City shall receive, transport and treat by means of the Facilities the
-13 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 57/167
Domestic Sewage discharged by the Participant up to the Participant's
Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage. Unless otherwise provided i11
this Agreerrent (and/or in other agreerrents bet~~Ren Participants) , a
Participant shall not serve customers in another Participant's service
area, subject to applicable laws and regulations. The City will
provide this quantity of Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage as long
as the Participant shall require it, barring events and circumstances
which are beyond the City's control. However, this Agreement creates
no obligation by the City beyond the term of this Agreement.
5. 2. Capacity Limit. After construction of the
Improvements, no Party may discharge into the Facilities any Domestic
Sewage in amounts greater than its Allocated Capacity of Domestic
Sewage, and the City may refuse to accept and treat any arrounts in
excess of any Party's Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage. If the
City determines that the anount of the Party's Dones tic Sewage is in
excess of the Party's Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage, the Party
shall pay, in addition to its ordinary charges described in Section
7.1, any extraordinary costs incurred by the City to treat the excess
Domestic Sewage, as well as costs related to capital costs to treat and
transport the excess capacity. Capital costs for treating sewage flows
beyond the Capacity Limit or the Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage
without prior arrangerrents such as described below, shall be charged
according to the methodologies described in Section 5.4 on Transfers of
Capacity, and shall be credited to each Party based on its Allocated
Capacity of Domestic Sewage. The City shall account to any Party for
its extraordinary costs. Any extraordinary costs collected by the City
-14 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 58/167
from the Party shall be credited to the total Op2ration and Maintenanc-e
cost prior to apportionment of M & 0 costs to the other Parties tha.t
are within their respective Allocated Capacities of Domestic Sewage.
The City's acceptance of excess amounts on any occasion or occasions
shall not bind the City to accept excess Domestic Sewage amounts on any
other occasion. When the AADF of the Party reaches 85 percent of the
Party's Allocated Capacity of Domestic Sewage, the Party shall cOilll"ence
planning for treatrrent of its domestic sewage beyond its Allocated
Capacity of Domestic Sewage.
5. 3. Notification of Nearing Capacity Limit When any
Participant's flow reaches 85 percent of its Capacity Limit, the City
shall notify it in writing. The Participant shall corrn:rence the
preparation of plans to use its remaining Allocated Capacity and to
provide for additional capacity beyond the Capacity Limit. The
Participant shall be resr::onsible for providing the City with
information on proposed development which would increase its flows.
5. 4. Transfer of Capacity. If a Party desires to
discharge greater amounts of Domestic Sewage into the Facilities than
are allocated as set forth herein, it may request to purchase that
additional capacity from any other Party with purchased capacity in the
Facilities. If a Party determines that its Allocated Capacity of
Domestic Sewage is excessive it may offer to sell such excess capacity
to any other Participant. For the purposes of this Section 5 only, the
Town of Woodway shall be considered a Party and shall be given the
-15 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 59/167
opr:ortnni ty to purchase capacity in the future. It is fully recocy1izcxl
by the City and the Participants that no Party lS obligated in any way
to transfer capacity --ternr:orary or pennanent to any other Party.
The willingness of any Party to enter into a transfer arrangement and
the terms of such arrangerrent shall not be subject to review by the
OVersight Committee or to arbitration.
The City shall be notified of all pending and final transfers of
capacity and of all terms of such transfers in writing, and shall make
this information available to all Participants.
5.4.1. Cost of Capacity Transfer. The cost of
transferring such capacity shall be determined by the Future Value
rrethod which is based on the principle that the capacity purchaser
should reimburse the capacity seller for all previous payrrents which
the seller has made for the transferred capacity, and for the
canr:onnded costs of such payments as defined by an interest rate which
the City or the Participant could have expected to receive by investing
these payrrents. The interest rate shall be set by the capacity seller
and shall be consistent with generally accepted public accounting
principles. Exhibit E, attached and incorr:orated herein by reference,
describes the methodology that would be used to derive the capacity
transfer price at any future year.
5. 4. 2. Alternative Costs of Capacity Transfer. Any two
Participants, or any Participant and the City, may agree to different
terms than those described a.tove and in the methodology in Exhibit E.
-16 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 60/167
5.4.3. Sharing in Capacity Transfers. In the event that
any two participants have agreed to a transfer of capacity on either
cost basis ab:we, the other Participants shall be given the
opportooity to participate in the transfer if they agree to the
transfer costs, and if sufficient capacity lS available.
5. 4. 4. Temporary Capacity Transfers. Ternp:>rary capacity
transfers will be permitted, for a period not exceeding five years,
from any Party having excess capacity to any Party needing capacity on
the basis of any tenns negotiated between those Parties. The
Participants agreeing to a temporary capacity transfer shall notify the
City of "b'le tenus of their arrangerrent, which shall include a plan for
ending the temporary transfer by demonstrating how permanent provisions
· are to be rrade. In no event rray the the total Allocated Capacity of
Darestic Sewage of the Parties after the transfer exceed the Allocated
Capacity of Domestic Sewage of the Parties before the transfer.
5. 5. Treatrrent of Dorrestic Sewage Only. No Party shall
discharge into the Facilities any wastewater other than Domestic
Sewage. The City is obligated to treat only Dorrestic Sewage and may
reject all other fonns of wastewater. 'I'he City may refuse to transport
and treat Domestic Sewage from those portions of any Participant's
sewage collection system which do not conform to DOE and/or EPA
standards for Domestic Sewage.
-17 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 61/167
5. 6. Sewage Quali~_ While there has hist~orically l::Jeen,
and continues to l::Je, a presumption that each Participc1nt' s and the
City's sewage flows are predominantly domestic residential flows with
reasonable, and approximately equivalent, levels of Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOO) and Suspended Solids (SS) levels, the Participants and
the City shall l::Je willing to address any changes in such
presumptions. The Participants and the City shall cooperate to
develop, as needed, ordinances and programs to mitigate BOO and SS
levels which are higher than acceptable norms, as determined by either
regulatory requirements or by generally accepted environmental
practices. The costs of such programs, if and when undertaken, shall
be directly applied to Parties responsible for the discharge of
nonconforming wastewater and, unlike general Maintenance and Operation
costs, shall not be based on overall sewage flow levels of the City and
the Participant.
5. 7. Pre-Treatment Ordinances . If and when required to
do so by EPA or OOE, or other applicable regulations and agreements,
all the Parties shall adopt a Pre-Treatment Ordinance (or Resolution
as may be appropriate) meeting all Federal and/or State requirements.
The City shall be responsible for the administration and operation of a
pre-treatment program, if and when mandated. Admlllistration and
operation shall include, but not be limited to, developing procedures,
forms, and instructions; categorizing dischargers; records keeping;
compliance tracking; establishment of annual limits; sampling, testing,
and monitoring; preparation of control documents; and preparation of
permits. Each Participant shall be responsible within its jurisdiction
-18 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 62/167
for identification of dischargers, issuance of control documents,
issuance of r:ermits, and enforcement of compliance, and collection of
any sr:ecial fees, r:enal ties, or other assc:x:::ia ted extraordinary
charges. All City costs shall be included in the direct costs of
Operation and Maintenance of the treatrrent plant. All the costs
relating to the responsibilities of each Participant shall be absorbed
by the Participant.
Section 6. Operation, Treatrrent and Quality of the Facilities
and the Participant 1 s Internal System.
6. 1. Operation and Maintenance of the Facilities. The
City shall own and shall be responsible for the or:eration and
mintenance of the Facilities, both before and after construction of
the Irrproverrents, subject to the terms of this Agreercent. The
Facilities shall be or:erated and maintained in accordance with high
engineering standards, and the standards established by the EPA, the
OOE, the Washington State Departrrent of Social and Health Services and
other federal, state and local agencies. The quantity of DolU2stic
Sewage discharged by a Participant into the Facilities shall be IU2tered
at the Influent Point, with the exception of co-mingled flows which
will be accounted for by other generally accepted methods using either
Equivalent Custol112r Units, directly IU2asured water flows for winter
months, or other IU2thods approved by the Oversight Corrmi ttee. The
IU2ter that measures the Participant 1 s discharge of Domestic Sewage into
the Facilities shall be calibrated by the City at least once each
-19 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 63/167
calendar year with the presence of any Participant tha-t ~;o desire:;, and
may be inspected by either Party at the e:xr:;en~;c of such p:-J.rty at any
tirre up:::m reasonable notice to the other. The City will continue to
monitor other relevant variables such as water consumption by each
Participant, rainfall, and other suitable variables, w11ich will be used
to provide redundancy for failed rreters and an alternative method to
check the validity and accuracy of ·the meter readings. The City and
the Participants shall commission a separate engineering study to
evaluate metering devices and practices so as to be able to install and
properly operate the most suitable measurement and recording devices
for the City's and the Participants' needs.
6. 2. Reporting Requirements. Each Participant shall
provide the City with monthly reports of the number of sewer
connections. The City shall monthly read, record and report the arrount
of measured Domestic Sewage, measured in .MGD, discharged into the
Facilities, accounted for by Participant. If a Participant is notified
that it has reached 85 percent of its Capacity Limit, the Participant
shall at least once every calendar quarter thereafter advise the City
in writing of any governmental or private actions that will affect the
volume and quality of the Participant's Domestic Sewage flow, including
but not limited to the issuance of building permits, sewer permits,
water permits and plat approvals, the adoption of land use and zoning
ordinances or arnendrrents thereto, and the execution of developer
extension contracts.
-20 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 64/167
The City shall periodically ins1x:ct its FaciliLies and the:
Participant shall periodically inspect its Internal System to ensure
adherence to applicable standards and to minimize infiltration,
exfiltration and deposits of rock or other debris. During construction
of the Improvements and thereafter, the City and any Participant at any
reasonable time may inspect the Internal System and the Facilities.
6. 3 • The Participants ' Internal System. Each Participant
shall operate and maintain its Internal System at its sole expense,
including all of its facilities as required to maintain the volume and
quality of l))rrestic Sewage within the limits set forth in this
Agreement. Each Participant shall observe the highest practicable
standards and practices in the construction, operation, and maintenance
of its Internal System with particular attention to the following: (a)
minimizing entry into the sewerage system of groundwater and/ or surface
water (I/I -infiltration and inflow) ; mintaining a favorable
character and quality of Dorrestic Sewage in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 5.6, (b) eliminating septicity and
objectionable odors, entry of petroleum wastes or other chemicals
and/or wastes detrimental to sew=r lines, pumping stations, the
Facilities, and the waters of Puget Sound; and {c) maintaining an
efficient and economical utility operation, while achieving optimum
pollution and environrrental control. Each Participant shall prevent,
except for unusual circumstances to be reviewed and recomrended by the
Oversight Committee, the connection of any storm or drainage facilities
to its Internal System.
-21 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 65/167
The City shall give written notice to the Participant of any
condition within the Particip.:mt' s Internal System that violates thi~>
Agreement or applicable laws, regulations or penuits. If the
Participant does not correct such condition within a reasonable time
after the City gives written notice thereof, the Participant shall pay
to the City any reasonable and necessary costs and expenses incurred by
the City in connection with such condition. If the Participant
discharges into the Facilities any solids, liquids, gases, toxic
substances or other substances which the City reasonably believes 1s
causing or will cause damage to the Facilities, or is creating a public
nuisance or a hazard to life or property, the Participant shall either
discontinue the discharge of such substances or pay for the costs of
modifying the Facilities so that they are capable of satisfactorily
handling such substances. Because substandard conditions of Domestic
Sewage may cause serious damage to the Facilities, the Participant
shall comply with any City order regarding the composition of Domestic
Sewage, and after compliance may thereafter cause to be arbitrated the
reasonableness of that order in accordance with Section 10.
The Parties shall cooperate with each other to detennine the
source of possible violations of applicable law, regulations and
pennits (including applicable NPDES Pennits). In the event the City is
fined or otherwise penalized by local, State, or Federal agencies for
failure to operate or maintain the Facilities in accordance with the
requirements of the agencies, and it is derronstrated to the
satisfaction of the City that such failure is due in whole or in part
to the Participant's discharge of Domestic Sewage in violation of this
Agreement, then the Participant shall pay its allocable share (as
-22 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 66/167
determined by the parties or by an arbitrator in accordance with
Section 10) of the costs of such fines or penalties, including its
share of the associated administrative, legal and engineering costs
incurred by the City in connection with the fines or penalties.
6. 4. Ballinger Lift Station and Related Facilities. The
City, at its convenience, but no later than one year after completion
of the Treatment Plant Project, shall assume ownership and operational
responsibility for the Ballinger Lift Station and related meters and
sev;er mins frau the City of Mountlake Terrace. If found necessary on
the basis of the City's evaluation and at the City's discretion, these
facilities shall then be upgraded to conform with City standards and
needs, with capital cost participation by Mountlake Terrace and Ronald
Sev;er District based on capacity and with each of those Participants
paying its share of the capital costs at the tirre of construction.
Operation and Maintenance costs will be allocated to each Participant
annually on the basis of AADF.
The City shall have the option of transferring the
responsibility for the flows currently transported through the
Ballinger Lift Station to the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
("Metro") in the event that a sewage exchange for Metro Richrrond Beach
flows is implemented. In the event of such a flow transfer, and the
construction of various facilities needed to implement the Metro
transfer, the City, MJuntlake Terrace, and Ronald Sev;er District v.Duld
retain the responsibility of all capital and Maintenance and Operation
Costs, including possible demolition of the existing lift station, on
-23 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 67/167
the basis of prorortionate share of annual flow throucrh the Mc~tro
transfer facilities. Under the Metro option the City would still
retain the resronsibilities related to the transrort m1d treatment of
the domestic sewage that currently flows through the Ballinger Lift
Station, including, but not limited to, planning, preliminary and final
engineering, rretering, recording, accounting and rerorting. 'rhe
assumption by the City of the Ballinger Lift Station --either through
the City's ownership and operation, or through transfer to Metro --
shall include a provision for honoring the existing agreerrent between
Mountlake TerraGe and Lynnwood for errergency overflow to the west trunk
sewer with payrrent to the City via Mountlake Terrace by rrethod that
will protect the parties' purchased capacity at the Facilities. Also
as part of this section, Mountlake Terrace shall have the right to
close out its existing remaining debt service obligation to the City
for existing facilities, because this remaining obligation is
relatively small and has a very brief remaining period.
The Parties to this Section 6.4 shall cooperate to the extent
necessary to facilitate the sewage transfer between the City and Metro,
recognizing that the construction of these facilities may include some
temporary flow diversions, construction impacts, and other impacts
'Which may not totally be anticipated at this tirre. It is recognized
that the costs of the Ballinger Lift Station and the related facilities
for implerrenting a Metro transfer are only participated in by the City,
Mountlake Terrace, and Ronald Sewer District.
-24 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 68/167
6. 5. Joint Use of Collection Systems Owned by One Pu.rty.
It is recognized by the Parties that at present certain Parties
discharge sewage into a collection and transmission systen1 which is
part of the Internal System of another Party. Furthermore, in the
future one Party may wish to use parts of the Internal System of
another Party as a practical rreans of transporting sewage. The joint
use areas are shown on the Service Area maps in Exhibit F.
The joint usage of such facilities shall be agreed to by both
the discharging Party and the Party that owns these facilities. The
discharging Party's volume of flow shall not be counted in the
calculation of the facility owner's volume of Allocated Capacity of
Domestic Sewage.
6. 6. Charges and Procedures Related to Joint SeY.Brage
Areas of Olympic View Water and Sewer District and the City of
Edm::mds. The joint areas of these t\\D Participants are shown in
Exhibit F. The discharging Participant shall be responsible for all
charges collected by the City for the transmission and treatrrent of the
Domestic Sewage discharged into the joint facility, including all the
costs contained in this Agreement , if applicable. The Participant
owning the facility shall be reimbursed by the discharging Participant
at the owning Participant's current rates for all costs related to the
jointly used collection facility including Maintenance and Operation
cvsts and General Facility Fees (also known as connection charges)
related to this facility only. The discharging Participant shall be
responsible for the billing of the discharging customer and for
reimbursing the facility owner for its costs relating to the shared
-25 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 69/167
facility. Sev.:er pennits and inspections shall lx? provided by the
discharger's Participant and such Participant shall provide the
facility owner with a copy of the side sewer card and inspection report
within 30 days after the final inspection. Should a jointly used
Internal System require either capacity expansion or other capital
improvements, the terms of funding such improverrents shall be
negotiated between the facility owner and the discharger's Participant.
Section 7. Payrrent for Maintenance, Op::ration, and Overhead
Costs for the Treatnent of J::)c)rrestic Sewage.
7. 1. M:mthly Payments. Cor:nrrencing as soon as practicably
possible after the execution of this Agreerrent, the Participant
shall make mJnthly payments to the City for the transportation and
treatnent of each Participant's Domestic Sewage. The IIDnthly payments
shall consist of one twelfth of the Participant's proportionate share
of the Maintenance and Operation Costs and Overhead Costs adopted in
the annual budget of the City for the Facilities. Each Participant's
percentage share of the total annual Maintenance and Operation Costs
and Overhead Costs shall be detenuined by dividing the MDF of the
Participant for the calendar year preceding the budget year by the sum
of the MDF of the Participants and the City for the calendar year
preceding the budget year. If the total amJunt paid by the Participant
during any calendar year is different from the amJunt due and owing for
the calendar year based on actual MDF and Maintenance and Operation
Costs and Overhead Costs, a final adjusting bill or payment shall be
made by the City by April 1 of the subsequent year with the adjustnent
-26 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 70/167
being paid or credited in 6 equal monthly installrrents. 'I'he estimated
current m::mthly payn-ents shall be canputed on the basis of the
following formula:
Allocation = (fust recent July-July flow %) X (Adopted O&M Budget) /12
:Note: for the purposes of this Agreement the 0 & M Budget shall
include the Overhead costs as well as direct costs.
The City shall provide the Participants with a full
accounting of all flows for each calendar year as well as a separate
surrmary of the actual Maintenance and Operation Costs incurred during
the previous calendar year. The flows and costs will include both the
Facilities and the Other Facilities, and shall be provided at the
earliest time possible during the calendar year, and no later than
March 1, barring unforeseen circumstances.
Each Participant's monthly payments shall be due at the
earliest date depending on the Participant's accounts payable cycle.
In the event that the Participant's payment is received more than 45
days after receipt of City's bill, the City shall be entitled to a late
payment surcharge equal to the interest vvhich the payment w:::>uld have
earned for the period in excess of 45 days, based on an interest rate
typically used for municipal investing purposes.
7. 2. Overhead Costs. In addition to the direct
Maintenance and Operation costs described in Appendix B, each
Participant will pay an Overhead Cost equal to 10 percent of the direct
Maintenance and Operation Costs allocable to that Participant. The
-27 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 71/167
percentage was computed by the "step-down" allocation nethod as appLied
to the City's general administrative, supervisory, and other indirect
costs related to the operation and maintenance of the Facilities. The
Overhead Cost percentage may be reviewed by the Oversight Conntittee at
the request of any of the Participants within 3 years of the new plant
start-up, estimated to be April of 1991. Any future review and change
in the percentage shall utilize the "step down" method.
7. 3. Standby Maintenance Charge. Whenever a Participant
discontinues the discharge of Domestic Sewage into the Facilities, or
discharges less than 0.3 MGD of Domestic Sewage into the Facilities for
a period of 30 days or more, the Participant shall pay to the City in
lieu of the monthly charge described above (Section 7 .1) until it
regularly discharges more than 0. 4 MGD, a standby maintenance charge,
which shall be a monthly fee calculated by the City to provide for the
Participant's proportionate share (as defined in Section 3. 2) of the
City's fixed (not related to amount of sewage) costs of. operating and
maintaining the Facilities in a condition of readiness to accept and
treat Domestic Sewage at the full capacity of the Facilities. The
Participant shall give the City written notice of its intention to
discontinue the discharge of Donestic Sewage (or to reduce its regular
discharge to less than 0.3 MGD) at least 2 months prior to such
discontinuance, and shall give the City 2 months notice of its
intention to commence discharging Domestic Sewage over 0.4 MGD into the
Facilities. Overhead Costs shall be added to this charge.
-28 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 72/167
7. 4. Facilities Capital Jmprovernents Fund. 'I'he City
shall establish a capital improvements fund to handle futtrre capital
improvements, rna jor replacements, or rna jor repairs not included within
the regular Maintenance and Operation Costs. 'rhe amount of the capital
improvements fund shall be initially set at $100,000. Each Participant
shall contribute to the fund in the same ratio as its original
allocated capacity percentage as shown in Exhibit A. Disbursements
from the fund shall be treated as having been made on a pro rata
basis according to the same allocation as contributions to the fund.
Initial assessments to the fund shall be made in equal annual
installments over a period of five years. Subsequent assessments shall
be structured so as to maintain as nearly as possible a $100,000
balance, and shall be phased on the same basis as the original
assessments to the fund. Every five years the nominal amount of the
fund (originally $100,000) shall be increased to reflect inflationary
cost increases, using such cornm::mly accepted indices as the Engineering
News Record (ENR) Construction Index.
'I'he City shall maintain a separate accounting of the fund with any
interest earning accruing and remaining in the fund.
Disbursements from the fund in excess of $30,000 (as adjustable
for inflationary cost increases as described above) shall be approved
by the City Council, only after review and camrent by the Oversight
Corrmittee.
'I'he existence of the capital Improvements Fund and the fact that
expenditures are made therefrom shall not be construed as limiting the
ability of the City to make and allocate to the Participants needed
expenditures on an emergency basis and under the terms of this
-29 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 73/167
Agreerrent when the public safety 1 healUl and general welfare 1 legal and
regulatory requirerrents or unforseen circumstances require exp::-rlitious
action.
Money ln the Capital Improvements Fund shall be used only for
future capital improverrents, major repairs and major replacerrents to
the Facilities, and shall not be pledged to or used for payment of any
l::onds, notes or obligations of the City or any of the other
Participants. Expenditures from the Fund shall be considered a
Maintenance and Operation Cost as defined in this Agreerrent and those
expenditures shall be made as directed by the City. For purposes of
cost allocation to Participants, however, these expenditures in the
Maintenance and Operation Costs category will be allocated on the basis
of Allocated Capacity of Dcmestic Sewage and not on the basis of annual
flow.
7 . 5. Participant's Rates and Sources of Payment. The
Participant shall pay the charges described in Sections 7.1 through 7.3
out of the revenues of the Participant' s Internal System. The
Participant's payments to the City shall be part of the expenses of
mintenance and operation of the Participant's Internal System, prior
and superior to any charge or lien of any revenue bonds issued by the
Participant that are payable from the revenues of its Internal System.
The Participant shall establish rates and collect fees and charges for
sewer service in amounts at least sufficient to pay for (a) the
maintenance and operaton of the Participant's Internal System,
including the Participant's payrrents to the City, and (b) the principal
-30 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 74/167
of and interest on any and all Participant revenue obligations that
constitute a charge on the revenue of the Participant's Internal Syste_m.
7. 6. City Rates. The City shall establish rates and
collect fees for sewer service in amounts at least sufficient to pay
for (a) the maintenance and operation of the City's sev.er system,
including its share of the Facilities, and (b) the principal of and
interest on any and all City revenue obligations that constitute a
charge upon the revenues of the City's sewer system.
7. 7. Books and Accounts. The City shall keep full and
complete books of accounts showing the Maintenance and Operation Costs
incurred in connection with the Facilities and the Other Facilities,
and the portion thereof applicable to each of the Participants. The
costs of keeping those books shall be considered to be a Maintenance
and Operation Cost to the City. Audits of the books shall be performed
every three years unless waived by the Oversight Committee, and the
cost shall be considered a direct cost of the Treatment Plant. More
frequent audits, if requested by any Participant, shall be charged to
the Participant (s) making the request.
Section 8. Oversight Committee.
8.1. Establishment of Oversight Committee. There is
hereby established an Oversight Committee for the purpose of (a)
advising the City concerning construction, operation, maintenance and
expansion of the Facilities, (b) giving the Participants the
opportunity to resolve any disagreements that may arise between or
-31 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 75/167
arrong them with res]?E:"ct to the construction, opc~ration, maintenance and
expansion of the Facilities, (c) providing a mechanism for revic::wing
construction cost which raise the total Project Cost above $39.5
million, and (d) for the additional purposes descril::ed in this
Agreerrent. The Oversight Committee shall consist of a designated
representative (or designated alternate representative) of each
Participant. Each Participant shall have one vote.
8. 2. Oversight of Construction. Prior to and during
construction of the Improverrents, the City shall report to the
Oversight Committee at least once each month concerning progress of the
Project. Any increase in the Construction Cost above $39.5 million at
the time of the awarding of the contract for construction of the
Improvements, or at the time construction contract amendments are
requested, shall l::e reviewed by the Participants in accordance with
Section 3.
8 . 3. Oversight of Operations and Maintenance. After
acceptance of the Improvements, the Oversight Committee shall meet at
least quarterly, unless, by a vote of at least a majority of the votes
held by the Participants, the Oversight Committee decides to meet less
frequently. At each quarterly meeting of the Oversight Corrmittee, the
City shall report to the other Participants concerning the O]?E:"ration
and maintenance of the Facilities as more particularly described in
Exhibit B.
On or l::efore July 1 of each year, the City shall provide to the
other participants a preliminary proposed budget for OJ?E:"ration and
-32 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 76/167
maintenance of the Facilities during the following year. 'l'he City
shall review and consider any rer:orts and recommendations made by the
Oversight Committee on subjects and matters described in Exhibit B.
Section 9. Replace:rrent Standards; Insurance.
9. 1. Replacement and Rehabilitation Standards.
Replacement, reconstruction, rehabilitation, expansion or upgrading of
the Facilities shall be in accordance with applicable federal, state
and local laws and regulations. Additions, betterments and
improvements to the Facilities of the City shall be installed and
constructed in accordance with generally recognized engineering
standards at least equal to the standards of the City and in accordance
with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations.
9. 2. Insurance. The City shall purchase on behalf of all
the Participants and maintain, through either companies or insurance
pools, insurance sufficient to pay for all loss or damage to the
Facilities resulting from their operation in a normal and prudent
manner, including loss or damage caused by the operation of joint
sewerage facilities which are not a direct part of the Treatment
Plant. The Participant shall purchase and maintain, through either
companies or insurance pools, insurance sufficient to pay for all loss
or damage to the Facilities caused by the operation of its Internal
System. In the alternative, the City or a Participant may set aside
cash in a reserve fund in an amount sufficient to pay for such loss or
damage, subject to review and recommendation by the Oversight Committee.
-33 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 77/167
Section 10. Arbitration. In the event of a dispute bct'iM?en
the City and a Participant concerning any matters ari~>.ing under the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, unless specifi01lly excluded
from arbitration, the dispute shall first be considered by tl1e
Oversight Corrmittee in a non-binding mnner. If the dispute is not
settled in the Oversight Committee, it shall be placed before an
arbitrator approved by the disputing parties, and the decision of tl1at
arbitrator shall be final and binding on both parties. Hov;ever, the
parties by agreerrent may waive arbitration. The venue of the
arbitration shall be the Seattle vicinity, unless the disputing parties
agree otherwise. The arbitrator's fees and costs shall be shared
equally by the Parties.
Section 11. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall
inure to the benefit of and be binding U]?'Jn successors in interest and
assigns of the Parties, and is not intended to confer rights or
benefits U]?'Jn any third party except as expressly stated herein.
Performnce of the obligations undertaken by either party may not be
assigned without the prior written consent of the other, which consent
shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 12. Amendment or Modification. No amendment or
modification of this Agreement, including any addition or deletion
thereto, shall be effective unless approved and executed by the Parties
in the same form and manner as, and subject to the remaining provisions
of, this Agreement. In the event the City contracts with any
Participant in a manner that modifies the term of this Agreement, the
-34 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 78/167
City and that Participant shall offer the other Participants the
opportrmity to incorporate the same terms in this Agreement or in
additional contracts, assuming the modifications are applicable to the
Participants.
Section 13. Governing Laws. This Agreerrent shall be governed
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington.
Venue in connection with any legal proceeding affecting this Agreerrent
shall be in the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Snohcrnish
Cormty.
Section 14. Number and gender. Whenever applicable the use
of the singular number shall include the plural, the use of the plural
number shall include the singular and the use of any gender shall be
applicable to all genders.
Section 15. Notice. All notices and payrrents relating to
this Agreerrent shall be made at the following addresses, rmless the
other party is otherwise previously notified in writing:
To the City:
City of Edrronds
505 Bell Street
Edmonds, Washington 98020
To the Participant:
City of Mountlake Terrace
23200 58th Ave. West
Mormtlake Terrace, WA 98043-4697
Olympic View Water and Sewer
District
23725 Edmonds Way
Edmonds, WA 98020-6097
Ronald Sewer District
17505 Linden Ave. N.
P.O. Box 33490
Seattle, WA 98133
-35 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 79/167
Section 16. Tenn. The tenn of this agreement shall be for 30
years from its effective date. At the end of U1is period the parties
will negotiate in good faith towards the continuance of this Agree:rn:~nt
with the understanding that the economic tenus of continued
participation will reflect the investment of the Participants in the
Facilities and the remaining useful life and remaining capacity of the
Facilities at that time.
Section 17. Merrorandurn of Understanding. This Agree:rrent
shall be construed and applied consistent with the Merrorandurn of
Understanding, attached as Exhibit C, but in the event of conflict,
this Agreement shall govern. This Agree:rrent supersedes and replaces
sewage service agreements between the City and Olympic View Water and
Se\'.ler District (dated October 9, 1967) , and betVRen the City and the
City of Mountlake Terrace (dated October 5, 1971), and those agreements
shall be of no further force and effect.
EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE to be effective as of the date set forth
above, or such later effective date as may be required under Chapter
39.34 RCW, if applicable.
CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE CITY OF EI:MONDS
fuyor
-36 -VOL. 2146PAGE0040
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 80/167
-~ -
Attesto Q~ ~~A \ ..., v \
Approved as to Fonn: Approved as to Fonn:
OLYMPIC~ WATER AND SEWER DISTRicr RCNAI.D SEWER DISTRicr
President, Board of
Carrnissioners
Attest: ________ _ Attest=~----------------
Approved as to Fonn: Approved as to Fonn:
8806020157 -37 -VOL. 214 6 PAGE 0 0 41
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 81/167
Exhibit A
Allocated Capacity and Proportionate Share
Edm::mds**
Mountlake Terrace
Olympic View Water District
Ronald Sev.-er District
TOTAL:
Allocated capacity Proportionate
of Domestic Sewage* Percentage
4.609 M:;])
2.103 M:;])
1. 502 M:.;D
0.861 MQ)
9.075
50.787%
23.174%
16.551%
9.488%
100.000%
** Edmonds share includes separately contracted capacity for
approximtely 70 connections in the Town of Wcx:xiway, and separately
contracted capacity for approximately 200 connections for Lynnwood.
* Expressed in MGD's of AADF
-38 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 82/167
Exhibit B
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS -DIRECT
Direct costs include, but are not limited to: Labor, power, light,
water, heat, phones, chemicals, equipment, tools, materials, supplies,
insurance premiums, engineering services, attorney services, other
contract services, rent, inspection, and taxes;
The cost of rehabilitating, reconstructing or replacing equipment and
portions of the Facilities as needed to continue substantially the same
capacity and quality of service (Facilities Reserve and Replacement ,
Fund. , Sect.ion 7 . 4) /or ~debi;-serv±ee-eests for ol:d::i<jat-4en.s-incurred
~t, rehabilitation or reconstruction (provided, that
where the Participant provides a cash contribution for such
replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction, the City's debt service
costs relating to the same replacement, rehabilitation or
reconstruction shall not be included in Maintenance and Operation Costs
for purposes of this Agreement) ; and
· Such financing and debt service costs for which the Parties may becorre
jointly liable.
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS --OVERHEAD
These are the costs which are initially set at 10% of the Direct 0 & M
costs. They were canputed by the Step Down method, and are intended to
recover general governmental costs related to the operation of the
wastewater treatment plant and related facilities. These costs include
but are not limited to: financial costs including budgeting,
accounting, accounts payable; data processing; risk management;
personnel administration including hiring, personnel management;
buildings and grounds maintenance perforrred by the City; custodial v..Drk
if needed; general legal costs; security; equipment rental (unless
directly charged) .
-39 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 83/167
June 30, 1987
Rev. 7/15/87
Rev. 9/9/87
Exhibit C
Merrorandum of Understanding
Rev. 9/22/87 flows only
MEM)RANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Background
The representatives of the jurisdictions named below and referred to as
the Participants, have been meeting regularly since March, 1987, to
draft the elements of an Agreement for the provision of Secondary
Sewerage Treatment Facilities (the Project) by the City of Edmonds for
the Participants. This M9rrorandum incorporates rrost of the principles
and concepts which the Legislative bodies have set in position papers
exchanged earlier this year.
Immediate execution of this M9rrorandum will enable all the Participants
to commence financial participation in the project, and will be
followed by the expedient preparation of a full legal Agreement.
Principles
l. Each Participant is to fund its own share of plant design
capacity, which for the purposes of cost allocation is defined as
Annual Average Daily Flow (MDF), expressed in units of million
gallons per day (M:;D}.
2. The following ultimate design capacities, eA~ressed in Annual
Average Daily Flows, will be made available to each participant:
Edmonds
Mountlake Terrace
Olympic View Water District
Ronald Sewer District
Woodway (464 ECU's)
Lynnwood
TOTAL:
Capacity
4.498
2.082
1.487
0.852
0.107
0.049
9.076
Percentage
49.564%
22.938%
16.389%
9.383%
1.183%
0.543%
100.000%
Note: It is recognized that these percentages are subject to
minor fluctuations for a brief interim period while some
Participants are finalizing their precise flow figures.
3. The total project costs shall be allocated arrong the Participants
according to the percentages of capacity as conroi tted under i tern
-40 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 84/167
#2. Total project cost shall not exceed $45 million without~
Participant approval.
4. Annual Operations and Maintenance costs, formalized in an annual
budget, shall be allocated to the participants on the basis of
year 1 y Annual Average Daily Flow percentages. Payments will be
made on a rronthly basis
Allocation= (Last Year Flow%) x (Adopted Budget)/ 12
Note: An adjustrrent will be made at year's end to correct for
actual expenditures and for actual flows.
5. All participants concur as to the formation of a formal Oversight
Conmittee, advisory to the Edrronds City Council. The role of the
Ccmnittee, to be provided for in detail in the final Agreement,
shall include review and submittal of recommendations on various
operational and budgetary matters of a certain level of
significance. Exarrples would include the establishrrent of a
preliminary proposed annual budget by approximately the middle of
the year; overhead costs levels; Reserve and Replacement Fund
expenditures over $30,000; establishrrent and review of annual cost
audits; long term capital plans; and influent quality standards"
6. An overhead cost equal to 10% of direct costs of 0 and M shall be
charged to all participants. The costs included in the direct and
the overhead categories shall be detailed to the greatest extent
possible in a technical appendix to the Agreerrent. The overhead
factor can be reviewed by the Oversight Committee at the request
of any of the Participants within 3 years of new plant start up.
The Step-Down rrethod shall be utilized for the purpose of
computing and reviewing the overhead cost allocation.
7. Eligible costs shall include the costs of reasonable mitigation
rreasures at the present Dayton Street site, designed with intent
of minimizing and mitigating the impact of the plant on the
immediate residential and commercial neighborhood. Costs shall
include such elerrents as landscaping, buffering, limited
structural concealrrent of the secondary clarifiers, a pleasant
appearing street interface, and other necessary elerrents to
achieve the objectives of reasonable mitigation. Also included
will be the cost of the vacant parcel which was purchased by
Edrronds in 1984 for the purposes of expansion to secondary
treatrrent.
8. The final agreerrent shall contain provlslons for the establishrrent
of a reserve and replacerrent fund, to be shared in the sarre
proportions as the capacity (item #2 above). The arrount shall be
established by the Oversight Committee, and all expenditures from
the fund in excess of $30,000 shall be subject to its review.
This will not be construed as limiting the ability of Edrronds to
make and allocate to the Participants needed expenditures on an
emergency basis when the public safety, health, and general
-41 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 85/167
welfare, regulu.tory mndutes, or other unforeseen circurn:;tancc:;
require expeditious action.
9. Any governmental grants to the project, wheU1er made in a lump :mn
or Ulrough extended payments, shall be applied proportionately to
the capacity shares paid by the Participants.
10. Upon execution of this Merrorandum wiili me City of Edrronds, each
signatory shall cornrrence payrrent of outstanding and future
invoices related to the planning, design, and construction of me
project, at me percentage specified under item #2. Remittances
are to be made to the City of Edrronds on a rronilily basis.
Documentation for billing shall be in me same manner as for grant
reimbursements.
11. The final agreement Shall include a prOVlSlOn for ffie transfer Of
capacity arrong willing Participants in iliis Merrorandum and me
subsequent Agreement, and shall include a method of detennining
appropriate cost of such transferred capacity.
12. Provisions shall be included for rronitoring flows and land use
permits, and for ensuring mat allocated capacities are not
exceeded by any participant.
13. The City of Edmonds, no later than January 1, 1992, shall assume
ownership and operational responsibilities for me Ballinger Lift
Station and related meters and sewer mains from me City of
Mountlake Terrace. The facility shall be upgraded to conform with
City of Edmonds standards and needs, wiili cost participation by
Mountlake Terrace and Ronald Sewer District based on flows.
Operations and Maintenance costs shall also be allocated on me
basis on annual average daily flows. The City of Edmonds shall
have me option of transferring operation of iliis lift station to
Seattle Metro in the event mat a sewage exchange for Richm::md
Beach flows is successfully implerrented, and mat such transfer of
responsibilities is advantageous, to the same degree as wi iliout a
flow exchange to Metro, to all parties.
14. Existing debt service obligations for me present system (an
outstanding arrount of approximately $25,000) shall be prepaid by
roe City of Mountlake Terrace at the time when me City of Edmonds
assumes ownership and operational responsibility of the Ballinger
Pump Station and related facilities. This WJuld void existing
capital obligations on me present treatment plant.
15. The City of Edrronds shall have a separate agreement wiili Ronald
Sewer District for born sewage treatment and for me Ballinger
lift station operation. The fonuer agreement shall corrrrence wiili
the execution of this Memorandum, and me latter shall be
implemented according to #13.
16. OWnership, operation, and maintenance of me treatment plant, and
all attendant responsibilities, rest wiili Edmonds.
-42 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 86/167
17. The term of the agreement shall be for 30 years, with the
Participants having a lifet.in¥:? of plant interest by paying their
share.
18. Capacity will be based on flow quantities only and not on sewage
quality characteristics such as BOD and/or SS. Provisions will
be made for the City of Edmonds to determine the acceptability,
terms, and conditions for service to any customer within the
service area who is found to have excessive BOD, excessive SS,
or any other influent characteristics which may impact plant
operations and costs.
19 Provision shall be made for honoring existing agreement between
Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace for emergency overflow to west
trunk sewer with payment to Edmonds via Mountlake Terrace by
method that will protect the parties' purchased capacity.
20. Special provisions need to be made for cost allocation where the
Participants serve customers in other Participant's jurisdictions,
and where direct sewage metering is impractical.
21. Edmonds shall be responsible for the maintenance of accounting
systems as required my accepted standards.
22. Provision shall be made for arbitration of disputes.
23. The concepts contained in this Memorandum, and in the subsequent
full agreement, shall apply in predaninantly the same rrBliller to
all parties sharing in the capacity of the plant. Some provisions
may be necessary to address matters outside the Project of the
Plant Operations, and which are of interest to sane of the
Participants only. Should the Participants not sign this
merrorandum simultaneously, any "latecc:mers" shall make payments
to the other Participants (either directly or through Edmonds) for
expenses already incurred. It is anticipated that Participants
will be excluded from capacity participation in the treatment
plant, other than as provided in existing contracts, unless the
Memorandum is executed by September 20, 1987.
24. Edmonds and Olympic View Water and Sewer District agree to
negotiate in good faith any and all operational service and
administrative issues which are contained in existing agreements,
or issues not contained in any agreements, and fall outside the
funding of the Secondary Treatment Project and the operation of
the Plant.
25. Section 23 notwithstanding, the City of Edmonds, at its own
discretion, may assist the Town of Woodway in financing its share
of the Project, on terms which are acceptable to both parties.
This is in recognition of the unique obstacles which Woodway faces
in financing its share of the project costs. Other Participant
may offer the same kind of assistance to Woodway, subject to a
review by the City of Edmonds.
-43 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 87/167
26. The execution of the rvenorandum doc~> not limit the: right of oll
parties to negotiate the detaih:; of incorrx)rating t11c principle~;
of the MEmorandum into the final Agreement.
-44 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 88/167
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
SIGNATURE PAGE
City of Edmonds:
Attest: (J .fi.· ,,J:~, ~~ ~ Title'
City of Mountlake Terrace:
Ii!h~tfl-o~t?~~ 77'~~ (?"" ~tp if~~
Date: r/Yz/E)
Attest: ,<), ~ f4C&JL_ ~e~-Jit\-t(j
Ronald Sewer District:
Attest:
MEMOUND3/TXTSECON
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 89/167
Page 2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
SIGNATURE PAGE
Olympic View Water District:
Patricia L. Meeker
Date : ) l ~ :2 -ct \ --'--------/
Attest:
MEMOUND3/TXTSECON
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 90/167
Exhibit D
Equivalent Customer Calculation Parameters
In areas of co-mingled and/or unmetered flows, direct measurement
of one Participant's flows through the Internal System of another
Participant may not be practical. In such a case the Parties would
reach an agreement to determine alternative measures of sewage flows.
The following uses shall be considered as having the listed Equivalent
Custorrer Units :
Single Family House --1 ECU.
Non-Residential Dischargers (including all residential other than
single family houses) --1 ECU per 750 cu. ft. per rronth of water
usage.
The 750 cu. ft. per rronth per ECU equivalence shall be subject to
review by the Oversight Committee when requested by any Participant.
It is expected that Parties who use this Exhibit for computation of
sewage flows will take into account factors which may cause the literal
application of ECU methodology to either overestimate or
underestimate the sewage flows. As an example, a school with extensive
grounds would have very large seasonal fluctuations as to the actual
sewage being discharged into an Internal System of a Participant, as
well as in the consumption of water. The typical use of winter >vater
consumption, which excludes lawn watering, would not be an accurate
substitute because in the surmrter the school is vacant. Surmrter water
consumption, hovvever, is an inaccurate substitute as well l:::ecause in
includes irrigation water which is not discharged into sewerage
systems. This example illustrates the problem, but in reality no
school is in an area of co-mingled flows. In fact, almost all the
uses in co-mingled flow areas are residential.
-45-
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 91/167
Exhibit E
Methodology for Cost Canputation Related to Capacity Transfer
-46 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 92/167
EXHIBIT E
TRANSFER OF CAPACITY COST CALCULATIONS METHODOLOGY
PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING PARAMETERS
TOTAL COST: $39,500,000 BOND INTEREST:
GRANT: 50.00% TERM:
CAPACITY (MGD'S) 9.075 YEARLY PAYM'T:
1988 NET COST OF 0.1 MGD (Approx. 430 homes):
FUTURE VALUE OF 0.1 MGD IN YR. 20:
Average daily flo~ from typical home, gal.:
YEAR ACTUAL
DEBT SERVICE
8.00%
20
$22,166
$217,631
$1,014,368
230
CUMULATIVE
VALUE
FUTURE VALUE
INTEREST RATE:
8.00%
(defined by capacity seller on the
basis of a commonly used public
finance index for municipal
investments. It can be equal to
the bonding interest rate.)
FUTURE I YEAR FUTURE
VALUE I VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------1 --------------------------------
$22,166 $22,166 $22,166 I 31 $2,365,140
2 $22,166 $44,332 $46,106 I 32 $2,554,351
3 $22,166 $66,499 $71,960 I 33 $2,758,700
4 $22,166 $88,665 $99,883 I 34 $2,979,395
5 $22,166 $110,831 $130,040 I 35 $3,217,747
6 $22,166 $132,997 $162,610 I 36 $3,475,167
7 $22,166 $155,163 $197,784 I 37 $3,753,180
8 $22,166 $177,329 $235,773 I 38 $4,053,435
9 $22,166 $199,496 $276,801 I 39 $4,377,709
10 $22,166 $221,662 $321,112 I 40 $4,727,926
11 $22,166 $243,828 $368,967 I 41 $5,106,160
12 $22,166 $265,994 $420,650 I 42 $5,514,653
13 $22,166 $288,160 $476,469 I 43 $5,955,825
14 $22,166 $310,327 $536,752 I 44 $6,432,291
15 $22,166 $332,493 $601,859 I 45 $6,946,875
16 $22,166 $354,659 $672,174 I 46 $7,502,625
17 $22,166 $376,825 $748, 114 I 47 $8,102,835
18 $22,166 $398,991 $830,129 I 48 $8,751,061
19 $22,166 $421,157 $918,705 I 49 $9,451,146
20 $22,166 $443,324 $1,014,368 I 50 $10,207,238
21 $1,095,518 I 51 $11,023,817
22 $1,183,159 I 52 $11,905,722
23 $1,277,812 I 53 $12,858,180
24 $1,380,037 I 54 $13,886,835
25 $1,490,440 I 55 $14 '997 ,781
26 $1,609,675 I 56 $16,197,604
27 $1 '738,449 I 57 $17,493,412
28 $1,877,525 I 58 $18,892,885
29 $2,027,726 I 59 $20,404,316
30 $2,189,945 I 60 $22,036,661
---------------------------------------------------------------------------··-----------------------
NOTE: FUTURE VALUE COLUMN IS THE AMOUNT ~HIGH A PARTICIPANT ~LD HAVE HAD IF INSTEAD OF BUYING 0.1 MGD, ITS FUNDS
jAD BEEN INVESTED AT THE FUTURE VALUE INTEREST RATE. TYPICAL HOME FLO~S ARE FOR EXAMPLE ONLY.
FILE:FUTCOST1 4/8/88
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 93/167
Exhibit F
Description of Service Areas -1988
-47 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 94/167
Exhibit G
Preliminary Project Co,..;t: EstiJrvttcs
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
1990 Construction Costs
Sales Tax
Contingency
-Est. VE Savings
Subtotal
ALLIED COSTS
Engineering
Predcsign
Design
Construction
Legal
City Administration
Misc. and Contingency
Value Engineering
Contingency
Subtotal
TOTAL
$2 7,850,000
. 2,520,000
3,650,000
$34,020,000
-79 000
$33,941,000
320,674
1,969,384
1,867,412
75,000
200,000
85,000
482,530
.$5,000,000
$38,941,000
Potential Added Cost to Cover N. Clarifier
CONSTRUCTION 400,000
ENGINEERING 29,300
TOTAL, INCL OPTION $39,370,300
~ 48 -
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 95/167
Item 8.4
Packet pg. 96/167
City Council Agenda Item 8.5
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Revision to Section 17.95.090 of ECC – Commute Trip Reduction
(Second Reading)
DEPARTMENT:Engineering
PRESENTER:Mike De Lilla/Bertrand Hauss
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:I move to adopt ordinance number ____, an ordinance of the City of
Edmonds, Washington, amending the provisions of ECC 17.95.090
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program; and setting an effective date.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):n/a ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
The CTR plan was updated in 2025 and the new changes needed to be reflected in our City Code.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law requires employers in the most congested areas of Washington to
encourage employees to reduce the number and length of drive-alone commute trips made to their
worksite. The CTR Law (RCW 70A.15.4050) was adopted in 1991 as part of the Washington Clean Air Act.
The City of Edmonds partnered with Community Transit and other jurisdictions in Snohomish County to
update their respective Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Plans in 2025, because the current plan was set
to expire in 2025. The updated plan includes strategies to reduce traffic congestion, air pollution, and
fuel consumption by encouraging alternative transportation options for commuters from 2025 through
2029. Congestion and traffic affect more than just vehicles on the road; they impact our entire
community, increased traffic leads to higher air pollution and carbon emissions, posing risks to people
and the environment.
The update was approved by Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT), in 2025 and by Edmonds City Council on June 24, 2025.
An ordinance is now needed so that the changes included in this update will be reflected in Section
17.95.090 of Edmonds City Code (ECC), regarding the Services and Strategies the City will use to achieve
the identified CTR Targets.
Those services and strategies are included in different categories, such as worksite amenities, subsidies,
and parking management. From this list of options provided in the ordinance, the City will attempt to
implement the following:
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 97/167
1. Establish a program of alternative work schedules such as a 9/80 compressed workweek
schedule (under Worksite Amenities Section);
2. Conduct educational campaigns to raise awareness about alternative transportation options,
environmental impacts, and the benefits of sustainable commuting (under Worksite Amenities
Section);
3. Implement transportation incentive programs that offer rewards for avoiding single-occupancy
commuting (under Subsidies & Multimodal Support Section);
4. Provide subsidies or passes for transit fares (under Subsidies & Multimodal Support Section);
and
5. Provide vans for vanpools (under Subsidies & Multimodal Support Section).
Grant opportunities (such as Regional Mobility Grant) can be explored to possibly fund the purchase of
ORCA cards in the future. The cost of the ORCA cards could also be split between interested employees
and the City to reduce the financial contribution from the City.
RECOMMENDATION:
I move to adopt ordinance number ____, an ordinance of the City of Edmonds, Washington, amending
the provisions of ECC 17.95.090 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program; and setting an effective date.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
n/a
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Ordinance
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 98/167
- 1 -
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC
17.095.090 COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION (CTR) PROGRAM;
AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the CTR Plan Update was approved by Council in 2025;
WHEREAS, specific CTR targets were identified in this update; and
WHEREAS, new strategies and services were shown to achieve those CTR Goals
through worksite amenities, subsidies, and parking management;
WHEREAS, those updates need to shown in Section 17.95.090 of the ECC.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ECC 17.95.090 - Requirements for employers is hereby revised to read as
follows (deleted text is shown with strikethrough / new text is shown in underline).
A major employer is required to make a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70A.15.4050 and
this chapter, to develop and implement a CTR program that will encourage its employees to
increase non-drive alone commute trips. The employer shall submit a description of its program
to the city and provide quarterly progress reports to the city on employee commuting and
progress toward meeting the goals and targets. The CTR program must include the mandatory
elements as described below.
A. CTR Program Description Requirements. The CTR program description presents the
strategies to be undertaken by an employer to achieve the program goals and targets stated in
the city’s CTR plan. Employers are encouraged to consider innovative strategies and combine
program elements in a manner that will best suit their location, site characteristics, business type,
and employees’ commuting needs. Employers are further encouraged to cooperate with each
other and to form or use transportation management organizations in developing
and implementing CTR programs.
At a minimum, the employer’s description must include: (1) general description of the
employment site location, transportation characteristics, and surrounding services, including
unique conditions experienced by the employer or its employees; (2) number of employees
affected by the CTR program; (3) documentation of compliance with the mandatory CTR
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 99/167
- 2 -
program elements (as described in subsection (B) of this section); (4) description of the
additional elements included in the CTR program (as described in subsection (B) of this section);
and (5) schedule of implementation, assignment of responsibilities, and commitment to provide
appropriate resources.
B. Mandatory Program Elements. Each employer’s CTR program shall include the following
mandatory elements:
1. Transportation Coordinator. The employer shall designate an employee transportation
coordinator (ETC) to administer the CTR program. The coordinator and/or designee’s name,
location, and contact information must be displayed prominently at each major worksite. The
coordinator shall oversee all elements of the employer’s CTR program and act as liaison
between the employer and city. The objective is to have an effective transportation coordinator
presence at each worksite; a major employer with multiple sites may have one transportation
coordinator for all sites.
2. Information Distribution. Information about alternatives to drive-alone commuting shall be
provided to employees at least twice a year. One of the items distributed must be a description of
the employer’s worksite program. The employer’s program description and quarterly
report must identify the information to be distributed and the method of distribution.
3. Quarterly Progress Report. The CTR program must include a quarterly review of employee
commuting and progress and good faith efforts toward meeting the goals and targets as outlined
in the CTR plan. Major employers shall file a quarterly progress report with the city in
accordance with the format established by this chapter and consistent with the CTR board
guidelines*. The report shall describe each of the CTR measures that were in effect for the
previous quarter, and the number of employees participating in the CTR program. Within the
report, the employer should evaluate the effectiveness of the CTR program and, if necessary,
propose modifications to achieve the worksite’s CTR targets. The format of the report shall be
provided by the city. The employer should contact the city for the format of the report.
*CTR guidelines can be found at https://wsdot.wa.gov/business-wsdot/commute-trip-reduction-
program
4. Trip Data Measurement. Employers shall conduct a quarterly program data evaluation as a
means of determining worksite progress toward meeting CTR targets.
5. Annual Worksite Promotion of Employer CTR Program. Major employers will hold at least
one annual transportation fair or equivalent promotion which is available to all employees at
each major worksite.
6. ETC Training. ETCs will be required to attend an ETC basic training session within six
months of appointment.
7. Employer Notification. Employers will be required to notify the city or designee when there
are proposed changes to their CTR program, changes in ETC or contact information, and/or
changes in number of employees at the worksite.
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 100/167
- 3 -
8. ETC Networking/Advanced Training. ETCs will be required to attend at least six hours of
networking or advanced training per year. Training and networking sessions may include
marketing CTR programs to employees, trip planning, ridesharing, joint promotions and
networking meetings.
9. Additional Program Elements. In addition to the specific program elements described above,
the employer’s CTR program shall include additional elements as needed to meet
CTR goals and targets. Elements may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the
following:
a. Provision of preferential parking or reduced parking charges, or both, for high-occupancy
vehicles;
b. Instituting or increasing parking charges for single occupant vehicles;
c. Provision of commuter ride matching services to facilitate employee ride-sharing
for commute trips;
d. Provision of subsidies for transit fares;
e. Provision of vans for vanpools;
f. Provision of subsidies for carpools or vanpools;
g. Permitting the use of the employer’s vehicles for carpooling or vanpooling;
h. Permitting flexible work schedules to facilitate employees’ use of transit, carpools,
or vanpools;
i. Cooperation with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service to
the worksite;
j. Provision of bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas, and showers for employees
who bicycle or walk to work;
k. Provision of a program of parking incentives such as a rebate for employees who do not use
the parking facilities;
l. Establishment of a program to permit employees to work part- or full-time at home or at an
alternative worksite closer to their homes;
m. Establishment of a program of alternative work schedules, such as a compressed work
week which reduces commuting; and
n. Implementation of other measures designed to facilitate the use of high-occupancy vehicles,
such as on-site day care facilities and emergency taxi services. [Ord. 4333 § 17 (Exh. A), 2023;
Ord. 4058 § 1, 2017].
17.95.100Record keeping.
To help achieve the goals and targets of the CTR plan, Edmonds will revise the CTR ordinance
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 101/167
- 4 -
to require affected employers to implement additional measures designed to increase the
percentage of employees using some or all of the following modes: transit; vanpool; carpool;
bicycle or walking; telework, compressed work week, or flexibly work schedule; and other non-
single occupant vehicle modes. The revised ordinance will require affected employers to choose
at least five of the following measures including one from each category. Alternative measures
may be submitted by the employer to Community Transit for review and approval.
Category A, Employee Info & Worksite Amenities
• Allow flexible work schedules.
• Provide an employee telework program.
• Provide bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas and showers.
• Establish a program to permit employees to work part- or full-time at home or at an
alternative work site closer to their homes.
• Establish a program of alternative work schedules such as a 4/40 or 9/80 compressed
workweek schedule.
• Reduce barriers to use of high-occupancy vehicles by offering on-site day care facilities
and emergency taxi service.
• Conduct educational campaigns to raise awareness about alternative transportation
options, environmental impacts, and the benefits of sustainable commuting.
Category B: Subsidies & Multimodal Support
• Provide a commuter ride matching service.
• Provide subsidies or passes for transit fares.
• Provide vans for vanpools.
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 102/167
- 5 -
• Provide subsidies for carpooling or vanpooling.
• Offer employees the opportunity to make pre-tax payroll deductions for transit or
vanpool expenses.
• Permit the use of employer vehicles for carpooling or vanpooling.
• Implement a transportation incentive programs that offers rewards for avoiding single-
occupancy commuting.
• Cooperate with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service
to the work site.
Category C: Parking Management
• Institute or increase parking charges for single occupancy vehicles. Omit any parking subsidy
from the employee benefits package and use the onboarding processes and regular information
sharing to discourage driving to and parking at an employment site.
• Provide parking at a daily rather than monthly rate.
• Offer preferential parking and/or reduced parking charges for high-occupancy vehicles,
bicycles, and other forms of emerging micro-mobility.
• Offer a parking cashout program that pays cash to employees who do not use the employer’s
parking facilities.
• Provide parking space for carshare vehicles or company-owned cars for employee use.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 103/167
- 6 -
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically
delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect on the
latter date of either: (a) five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary
thereof consisting of the title; or (b) the date that the speed limit signs have been modified.
APPROVED:
MAYOR MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, LUKE LONIE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 104/167
- 6 -
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 105/167
- 7 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2026, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC
17.95.090 COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION PROGRAM;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________ 2026.
CITY CLERK, LUKE LONIE
Item 8.5
Packet pg. 106/167
4
6
8
City Council Agenda Item 8.6
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Snohomish county ILA (Second Reading)
DEPARTMENT:Information Services
PRESENTER:Brian Tuley
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish
County for a total dollar amount of $4,500.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:4500 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):512 technology fund ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
Edmonds 5 year ILA with Snohomish County to provide rack space in the data center and atrial imagery
for geographic systems expires in March of 2026. The item is a 5 year renewal to the in place ILA. This
item was approved by council to move to consent on the February 3rd council meeting.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
Cross connections are only available at county hubs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish County for a total dollar amount
of $4,500
BUDGET IMPACTS:
costs for this ILA are in the existing budget. This ILA does not increase budget costs.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
ILA attached
Item 8.6
Packet pg. 107/167
COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT In accordance with RCW Chapter 39.34 and to all other applicable laws, The City of Mountlake Terrace and the City of Edmonds, each of which may hereinafter be referred to as "agency," hereby agree to this cooperative governmental purchasing agreement
("Agreement") for various supplies, materials, equipment and routine, expert and/or consultant services, software, cloud services & platforms, using competitively awarded contracts. The following terms and conditions shall apply:
1. Each agency, in contracting for the purchase of supplies, materials, equipment and services, agrees at its discretion, to extend contracts for shared use to the extent permitted by law and agreed upon by those parties and vendors. 2. Each agency is responsible for compliance with any additional or varying laws and
regulations regarding purchases. 3. The originating contracting agency does not accept responsibility or liability for the performance of any vendor used by the purchasing agency as a result of this
Agreement. 4. Each agency shall be responsible for the payment of any item(s) purchased through a contract or purchase order that resulted from this Agreement.
5. This Agreement shall remain in force until cancelled in writing by either party.
By:______________________________
Name: Mike Rosen
Title: City of Edmonds, Mayor
Date:____________________
By:______________________________
Name:
Title:
Date:____________________
Mike Rosen (Aug 7, 2024 09:42 PDT)
08/07/2024
Item 8.6
Packet pg. 108/167
ILA._MountLake.2024
Final Audit Report 2024-08-07
Created:2024-08-07
By:Brian Tuley (brian.tuley@edmondswa.gov)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAApHMr9YHjPq3MtaMrDI7lyvmmoFVGIXi7
"ILA._MountLake.2024" History
Document created by Brian Tuley (brian.tuley@edmondswa.gov)
2024-08-07 - 3:58:10 PM GMT
Document emailed to Mike Rosen (Mike.Rosen@EdmondsWa.Gov) for signature
2024-08-07 - 3:58:13 PM GMT
Email viewed by Mike Rosen (Mike.Rosen@EdmondsWa.Gov)
2024-08-07 - 4:42:03 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Mike Rosen (Mike.Rosen@EdmondsWa.Gov)
Signature Date: 2024-08-07 - 4:42:13 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2024-08-07 - 4:42:13 PM GMT
Item 8.6
Packet pg. 109/167
City Council Agenda Item 8.7
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Resolution Adopting the BID Recommendations (Second Reading)
DEPARTMENT:City Council Office
PRESENTER:Teresa Simanton
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
WA, expressing support for the Edmonds Downtown Business
Improvement District (BID) without need for reestablishment as
contemplated by Resolution 1543and adopting the BID’S
recommendation #1.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):N/A ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
On September 16, 2025, the BID’s President presented to the City Council the recommendations passed
by on August 14th, 2015 by the BID/Ed@ Advisory Board. the Board. The Board requests Council find the
expectations set forth in Resolution 1540(R-1543) have been satisfied and formally sunset the
Resolution. On January 27th, the Council agreed to the request and directed staff to bring closure to the
directives expressed in Resolution 1543.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
The Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) was established by Ordinance 3909 in
January of 2013.
On April 2, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution 1543, which established the time frame for
consideration of a reestablishment work plan for the Edmonds Downtown BID. Section 2 of Resolution
1543 specifies that the City Council intends to take action on the BID’s reestablishment work plan no
later than summer 2025.
On July 23, 2024, the Edmonds Downtown Alliance, in coordination with City staff and the consultant,
Uncommon Bridges, presented an outline of the process to achieve final work plan.
On August 14, 2025, the BID/Ed! Advisory Board met and approved several recommendations, as
outlined in Attachment 1, to present to the City Council as a proposed path forward. The proposal
outlines several options or Council’s Consideration.
On January 27th, The BID’s President presented to the City Council, the recommendations and requested
that the Council approve the steps taken as directed by R-1543 and asked council to approve the work
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 110/167
done as set forth in R-1543 and then sunset the Resolution as no further action is to be taken to
implement R-1543.
RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
WA, expressing support for the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District (BID)
without need for reestablishment as contemplated by Resolution 1543 and adopting the
BID’S recommendation #1.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
0
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
BID Findings and Recommendations
Resolution 1543
Resolution Expressing Support for the BID without Need for Reestablishment
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 111/167
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 112/167
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 113/167
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 114/167
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 115/167
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 116/167
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE EDMONDS
DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WITHOUT NEED
FOR REESTABLISHMENT AS CONTEMPLATED BY RESOLUTION 1543
AND ADOPTING THE BID’S RECOMMENDATION #1.
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2024, the Edmonds City Council adopted Resolution 1543,
which contemplated the development of a workplan to reestablish the BID; and
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2024, the Edmonds Downtown Alliance, in coordination with
City staff and the consultant, Uncommon Bridges, presented an outline of the
process to achieve a final work plan; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2025, the BID/Ed! Advisory Board met and approved
several recommendations, as outlined in Attachment 1 hereto; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2025, the BID’s President presented to the City
Council the recommendations outlined in Attachment 1; and
WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council considered these recommendations again on
January 27, 2026 and directed staff to bring closure to the directives expressed in
Resolution 1543; now therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Edmonds City Council adopts recommendation number 1 from
Attachment 1 and expresses support for the BID as-is, without need for
reestablishment as contemplated in Resolution 1543.
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 117/167
Section 2. The purpose of Resolution 1543 is hereby deemed satisfied. No further
action needs to taken to implement Resolution 1543.
RESOLVED this 10th day of February, 2026.
CITY OF EDMONDS
_______________________
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, LUKE LONIE
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO. ____
Item 8.7
Packet pg. 118/167
4
1
8
City Council Agenda Item 9.1
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Jacobs On Call Services Contract
DEPARTMENT:Public Works and Utilities
PRESENTER:Andy Rheume
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the Mayor to enter into a on call contract with Jacobs
Engineering Group Inc. in the amount of $500,000.00
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:$500,000.00 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):423 ☒ Budget Reallocation Required
☐ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
The Public Works Department would like to contract Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. to perform a variety
of necessary projects to address the condition of the Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
Context: Jacobs Engineering has been the engineer of record at the Edmonds Wastewater Plant
for decades and has done a good job providing engineering services and oversight. Due to their
intimate knowledge of the Wastewater Plant, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. has unique
expertise in providing a number of key services that are needed at the plant with urgency to
address the plant's ability to treat wastewater. In addition to the expertise necessary, they have
the manpower needed to perform the work to develop deliverables necessary to make the
plant more redundant and improve our ability to treat wastewater before it enters the Puget
Sound.
Staff have used the sole source procurement process outlined in section 15.1 of the Purchasing
Policy. Staff have confirmed with the City Attorney’s office as required by the policy and they
concur that sole source procurement is appropriate for this contract.
Analysis: Staff are proposing an on-call contract with Jacobs Engineering, and the proposed
amount of the contract allows staff to create work orders for a couple known tasks and it allows
for additional work orders when engineering is needed during an emergency or when an issue
arises at the plant. Known work products that are needed include updating Standard Operating
Procedures, which needs updating and is required by our NPDES Wastewater Discharge Permit.
If approved, staff would also initiate an existing conditions scan of the plant which will update
as-built information and would create the engineering foundation for future engineering
drawing to improve the plant. Last, if approved staff would initiate engineering evaluation of
the treatment process with the purpose to identify process changes and retrofits that will
better treat wastewater before its discharged to the Puget Sound.
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 119/167
4
1
8
Alternatives: Staff could proceed with individual contracts for specific tasks. This has been the
standard practice in the past and limits staffs ability to have engineering resources readily
available and creates more administrative effort than using an on-call contract.
RECOMMENDATION:
I move to authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. in the
amount of $500,000.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
Funding for this on-call contract will come from the wastewater CIP/CFP.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachments Added
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 120/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 121/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 122/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 123/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 124/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 125/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 126/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 127/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 128/167
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Service Agreement
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
ON-CALL ENGINEERING SERVICES
Scope. The Consultant shall provide engineering consultation services to the City of
Edmonds for the following primary projects:
WWTP Engineering Drawings and Plant Scan: The Edmonds WWTP last engineering
grade comprehensive set of drawings were completed in 1991. Over almost 50 years, new
lines, equipment, and structures have been added to every space and need to be reflected in
an updated comprehensive plant drawing set. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. will assist in
this endeavor by providing comprehensive scans of spaces in the plant, and then providing
both digital and physical documents as deliverables for reference for current and future
capital and non capital projects.
WWTP Operation SOP Manual: Similar to item one in the SOW, the Edmonds WWTP
Operating Manual does not reflect the current operating standards of the plant due to several
decades of equipment and process changes. This manual is a key regulatory item important
to the plant’s operating permit andJacobs Engineering Group Inc . will create a new SOP
based on guidance and knowledge provided by the operators of the treatment plant, for
submittal to the appropriate agencies.
WWTP Process and Operational Consultation: As processes and operations have changed,
the plant may not be operating to the best of it’s capability.Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
will provide guidance and assist with testing new chemicals, processes and workflows in
limited capacities before deployment for the purposes of improving the wastewater
treatement process. Jacobs will provide written documentation for that gives background
knowledge, context and expected outcomes for each recommended improvement.
Other Secondary Projects: While executing the SOW, other key projects may arise that
could benefit the Edmonds WWTP. The SOW excludes any and all work related to the c511
Carbon Recovery Project.
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 129/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 130/167
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 131/167
1
SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION
The City of Edmonds Contracting and Purchasing Policies and Procedures allow for sole
source procurement when appropriate. A sole source purchase means that a single
vendor is uniquely qualified to meet the purchasing/procurement objective and therefore
the purchase/procurement is exempt from the bidding process.
Date: January 20, 2026 Contract Amount: $500,000.00
Department: WWTP Requestor: Tirrell Brown
Description of Purchase/Service: Services for various in-house projects for the purpose of improving plant
redundancy, processes, and knowledge of systems.
Vendor Name: Jacobs Solutions Inc. Address: 1100 112th Ave NE, Suite 500
City, State, Zip Code:Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone Number: 425-453-5000
Contact:Name: Micheal Reimbold
Title: Manager of Projects
Phone: 425-453-5000
Fax: _______________
E-mail: Micheal.Reimbold@jacobs.com
Please check appropriate box
Research has determined that equipment or service is necessary and available
from only one vendor.
Item specifically required by grant or contract provisions.
Government mandated services.
Emergency purchase, repair services or parts replacement.
Only compatible with existing system or equipment.
Other – Please explain
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 132/167
2
EXPLANATION
City staff have diligently sourced engineering consultant services to assist City staff with
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) projects that will improve plant processes and
redundancy. Jacobs Solutions Inc. is the chosen Consultant because it is uniquely able
to provide these services. Jacobs Solutions’ representatives have invested years in
familiarizing themselves with the assets of the WWTP and the plant’s operating
capabilities and limitations. This extensive knowledge of the existing WWTP conditions
serves as an invaluable foundation for recommending and implementing key projects
that would benefit the plant immensely. Jacobs Solutions has previously assisted the
City with the completion of several key projects, including a criticality study, which has
assisted in guiding plant investment priorities. City staff believe that it would take another
consultant years to accumulate the amount of knowledge and understanding that Jacobs
Solutions has already acquired by virtue of being a part of several important projects in
the past 5 years.
CERTIFICATION:
I am aware of the City’s requirements for competitive bidding and the established criteria
for justification for sole source/sole brand purchasing. As an approved department
designee, I have gathered the required information and have made a concerted effort to
review comparable/equipment or services. This effort is documented in this justification. I
hereby certify as to the validity of the information and feel confident that this justification
for sole source, sole brand procurement meets the City’s criteria and will withstand an
audit of the State Auditor’s Office or a vendor protest.
Tirrell Brown
Interim WWTP Supervisor January 20th, 2026
City Project/Budget Number:
Item 9.1
Packet pg. 133/167
4
7
3
City Council Agenda Item 9.2
February 10, 2026 - Regular Meeting
TITLE:Action on Six-Month Moratorium on Permit Applications Within the
Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) that Would Require
Stormwater Management (Second Reading)
DEPARTMENT:Planning and Development Services
PRESENTER:Mike Clugston
NEEDED FROM COUNCIL:Action
RECOMMENDATION:Move to adopt an ordinance of the City of Edmonds, Washington,
adopting a six-month moratorium on permit applications within the
Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area that would require
stormwater management and set the required public hearing for the
moratorium for March 3, 2026.
BUDGET:
Total Dollar Amount:0 ☐ Approved in Budget
Fund(s):0 ☐ Budget Reallocation Required
☒ No Budget Impact
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT:
City Council is asked to consider adoption of an ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on the
acceptance of permit applications that would trigger stormwater management requirements within the
Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). The moratorium is intended to pause new
development activity while the City completes the ongoing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
study and evaluates feasible, science-based stormwater management approaches for this closed-basin
aquifer.
Recent amendments to the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) included new CARA provisions that
effectively prohibit stormwater infiltration within the Deer Creek CARA. Because infiltration is currently
the only feasible method of stormwater management in this basin, staff has determined there is no
clear pathway for approval of certain types of development applications under the current regulatory
framework. The proposed moratorium provides interim regulatory clarity while the City completes
technical analysis and considers longer-term policy solutions.
CONTEXT, ANALYSIS, & ALTERNATIVES:
CONTEXT
This specific topic was first discussed on February 3, 2026. It had been conceptually referenced during
Council’s decision-making process with the larger critical areas ordinance update on January 6, 2026.
The Deer Creek CARA is a closed hydrologic basin where stormwater either infiltrates into the ground or
evaporates. Infiltration has historically been required and, in fact, relied upon to maintain aquifer
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 134/167
4
7
3
recharge. At the same time, emerging concerns regarding PFAS and groundwater protection have
prompted the City to initiate a focused PFAS study to inform future regulatory decisions using best
available science.
Prior to adoption by City Council at the January 6, 2026 meeting, staff identified that the proposed CARA
language would effectively prohibit all forms of stormwater infiltration within the Deer Creek CARA,
including systems that meet state underground injection control (UIC) and non-endangerment
standards. Given the absence of identified alternative stormwater management methods for this area,
staff does not currently see a viable approval pathway for development proposals that trigger
stormwater requirements.
PURPOSE
The proposed moratorium would temporarily suspend acceptance of permit applications that would
trigger stormwater management requirements within the Deer Creek CARA. The purpose is to:
• Allow sufficient time to complete the Deer Creek PFAS study;
• Evaluate whether feasible stormwater management alternatives exist for this area;
• Consider potential amendments to CARA and/or stormwater regulations informed by completed
scientific analysis; and
• Avoid the futile processing of applications during this interim period.
The moratorium is proposed for a period of six months, consistent with state law, with a required public
hearing to be held within 60 days of adoption (anticipated for March 3, 2026).
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1 – Take No Action (Council could decline to adopt a moratorium)
• Pros: Avoids controversy and other modest risks associated with moratoria.
• Cons: Leaves applicants and staff without a clear approval pathway for projects triggering stormwater
requirements, while still incurring permit fee costs; increases legal and procedural risk associated with
permit denial; wastes staff time processing futile applications.
Alternative 2 – Adopt Six-Month Moratorium (Recommended Action)
• Pros: Provides regulatory clarity over the short term; prevents owners from paying permit fees when
there is no feasible approval pathway; allows future decisions to be informed by completed scientific
study; consistent with precautionary approach that motivated the adoption of the CARA regulations,
while avoiding premature permanent regulation.
• Cons: Moratoria can be controversial and carry inherent, albeit modest, legal and policy risks.
RECOMMENDATION:
Move to adopt an ordinance of the City of Edmonds, Washington, adopting a six-month moratorium on
permit applications within the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area that would require stormwater
management and set the required public hearing for the moratorium for March 3, 2026.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 135/167
4
7
3
BUDGET IMPACTS:
No immediate budget reallocation is required. However, adoption of the moratorium will result in a
temporary loss of revenue associated with development activity within the Deer Creek CARA, including
permit fees, plan review fees, impact fees, and other development-related charges that would
otherwise be collected during the moratorium period.
That said, the adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance with the CARA amendments has already affected
the feasibility of development proposals within the Deer Creek CARA. As a result, revenue impacts
related to project infeasibility would occur regardless of whether a moratorium is adopted.
In this context, the proposed moratorium would serve to clarify for applicants, the public, and staff the
practical effect of the adopted CARA amendments while the PFAS study is completed. In addition, a
moratorium would improve administrative efficiency because it would reduce or eliminate time spent
processing futile applications. Staff could instead spend that time assessing the regulatory implications
of the new code. There are no direct expenditures associated with adoption of the moratorium.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Two additional pieces of information are included in this packet that were not in the February 3 packet:
a draft scope for the Deer Creek PFAS/stormwater study, and a memo from Herrera Environmental
Consultants describing the impact of the CARA code update on stormwater management in Deer Creek.
Council requested the draft study scope and the Herrera memo is intended to provide a fuller picture of
the complexities that arise with stormwater management given the prohibition on infiltration in the
Deer Creek CARA.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Moratorium Ordinance for Signature
Attachment 2 – Deer Creek PFAS/Stormwater Study Draft Scope
Attachment 3 – Stormwater Memo from Herrera Consultants
Attachment 4 – February 3, 2026 Slides
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 136/167
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ANY
PERMIT APPLICATIONS WHICH WOULD REQUIRE
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE DEER CREEK
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2026, the Edmonds City Council adopted the periodic update
to the City’s critical area ordinance (CAO); and
WHEREAS, the CAO included new regulations for the Deer Creek critical aquifer recharge
area (CARA), which read as follows: “The use of stormwater infiltration best management
practices (BMPs), including those that qualify as a Class V underground injection control well
(UIC), are prohibited for all land uses within all wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) associated
with Olympic View Water and Sewer District’s (OVWSD) 228th Street Wellhead and the Deer
Creek Springs Wellhead area, including their buffers.”; and
WHEREAS, the effect of this language is to prohibit all forms of infiltration in the Deer
Creek CARA; and
WHEREAS, infiltration is presently the only feasible means of managing stormwater
within the Deer Creek CARA; and
WHEREAS, the city is obtaining a study that will inform recommendations based upon
the best available science for managing PFAS-contaminated stormwater within a CARA; and
WHEREAS, the city is evaluating whether there are any other feasible means of
managing stormwater within the Deer Creek CARA; and
WHEREAS, the city does not see an approval pathway for permit applicants under the
regulations that are currently in effect for the Deer Creek CARA; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 authorizes the city council to adopt an immediate
moratorium for a period of up to six months without holding a public hearing on the proposal
provided that a public hearing is held within at least sixty days of its adoption; and
WHEREAS, the city council desires to impose a six-month moratorium on the
acceptance of applications for any permit or authorization to alter land, water, vegetation, or to
construct or modify any structure or improvement, and which would trigger stormwater
management requirements; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 137/167
Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this moratorium is to allow the city adequate
time to complete the PFAS study relating to the Deer Creek CARA, evaluate other feasible
means of managing stormwater, and, if appropriate, to draft and consider changes to the Deer
Creek CARA and/or stormwater regulation in response to the findings of that study.
Section 2. Moratorium Imposed. The city council hereby imposes a six-month
moratorium on the acceptance of applications for any permit or authorization to alter land, water,
vegetation, or to construct or modify any structure or improvement, and which would trigger
stormwater management requirements. The geographic scope of the moratorium is limited to the
Deer Creek CARA and its buffer.
Section 3. Duration of Moratorium. The moratorium imposed by this ordinance shall
commence on the effective date of this ordinance. As long as the city holds a public hearing on
the moratorium and adopts findings and conclusions in support of the moratorium (as
contemplated by Section 4 herein), the moratorium shall not terminate until six (6) months after
the effective date, unless it is repealed sooner.
Section 4. Public Hearing on Moratorium. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW
35A.63.220, the city council shall hold a public hearing on a moratorium within sixty (60) days
of its adoption. In this case, the hearing shall be held on March 3, 2026, unless the city council,
by subsequently adopted resolution, provides for a different hearing date. No later than the next
regular city council meeting immediately following the hearing, the city council shall adopt
findings of fact on the subject of this moratorium and either justify its continued imposition or
cancel the moratorium.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
should be held to be unconstitutional or unlawful by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 138/167
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically
delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5)
days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, LUKE LONIE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 139/167
1
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2026, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the
title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ANY
PERMIT APPLICATIONS WHICH WOULD REQUIRE
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE DEER CREEK
CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2026.
CITY CLERK, LUKE LONIE
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 140/167
1
Scope of Work – PFAS Study in Deer Creek
CARA
Background
The City of Edmonds has awarded funding to evaluate potential PFAS sources and pathways in
the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). Stormwater infiltration within this
recharge zone has raised concerns regarding PFAS migration to the aquifer. As a result of that
concern, the use of stormwater infiltration BMPs are now prohibited for new development within
the Deer Creek Springs Wellhead area and its buffers. In alignment with terms and conditions in
the settlement agreement, EA will implement a cost-conscious, technically rigorous scope to
identify sources, assess transport mechanisms, and provide the City with actionable strategies for
risk reduction.
Objectives
· Assess the presence, distribution, and profiles of PFAS within stormwater and shallow
subsurface pathways influencing the Deer Creek CARA.
· Identify likely sources and signatures of PFAS inputs using forensic techniques.
· Provide actionable recommendations for source control and protection of the underlying
CARA.
Study Area
The scope of work, as defined under the settlement agreement, is limited to evaluating potential
PFAS contamination risks and pathways within the CARA. The study will assess existing and
potential PFAS sources, stormwater conveyance and infiltration features, and runoff pathways
that may contribute PFAS to the CARA, consistent with the settlement’s intent, and the City’s
goal, to inform City Council decisions on CARA protections.
Task 1 – Project Kickoff and Project Management
· Meet with City staff to confirm project goals, key questions, schedule, and available
background information.
· Conduct a project kickoff meeting to align expectations, assumptions, and decision
context.
· Establish communication protocols, reporting cadence, and document review procedures.
· Confirm budget allocations and finalize the rainwater sampling and analysis approach to
maximize value within the ~$50,000 budget.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 141/167
2
· Provide ongoing project management, coordination, and quality control to ensure timely
and efficient completion of the study.
Task 2 – Literature Review and Desktop Source Identification
EA will conduct a targeted literature review and desktop assessment focused on identifying
potential PFAS sources in and around the Deer Creek CARA, with an emphasis on
residential and urban stormwater contexts. This task will not include new field sampling.
Key elements include:
· Review of published literature, regulatory reports, and guidance documents related to:
· PFAS occurrence in urban and residential stormwater and strategies for mitigation
of same.
· Atmospheric deposition and rainwater as PFAS sources.
· PFAS associated with building materials, infrastructure, landscaping materials,
and consumer products.
· Identification of potential PFAS sources relevant to residential neighborhoods and new
development, including:
· Roofing materials, sealants, coatings, and waterproofing products.
· Pavement treatments, asphalt modifiers, and construction materials.
· Playground surfaces, turf, and landscaping materials.
· Household and commercial product pathways relevant to runoff.
· Review of available information related to the Deer Creek CARA, including land use,
development patterns, topography, potential stormwater exposure pathways, historic
PFAS sampling data collected by the Edmonds School District from the Madrona School
site, historic PFAS sampling data, if any, collected by the Olympic View Water & Sewer
District at the Deer Creek Wellhead site, and aquifer recharge sources from outside of the
Deer Creek CARA.
· Preparation of a concise technical memorandum summarizing:
· Likely PFAS source categories applicable to the Deer Creek CARA with
concentration ratings, if available.
· Key data gaps and uncertainties.
· Implications for stormwater management and source control considerations.
· Effective PFAS monitoring strategies.
· Relative effectiveness of various strategies to protect the aquifer from PFAS
contamination as compared to the current strategy of prohibiting infiltration
BMPs for new development.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 142/167
3
Task 3 – Rainwater Sampling
EA will conduct a limited rainwater sampling effort to provide empirical data on PFAS inputs
via precipitation.
· Collect up to five (5) rainwater samples during storm events at locations coordinated
with the City.
· Sampling will follow PFAS best practices to minimize contamination and ensure data
quality.
· No passive samplers or stormwater conveyance sampling will be included under this task.
· Field documentation and chain-of-custody procedures will be maintained in accordance
with laboratory and QA/QC requirements.
Task 4 – Laboratory Analysis
· Analyze collected rainwater samples using EPA Method 537 Modified (537M) for a suite
of approximately 70 PFAS compounds.
· Analytical results will be used to:
· Characterize PFAS occurrence and profiles in precipitation.
· Compare observed PFAS signatures with those reported in the literature for atmospheric
and consumer-product-related sources.
· All laboratory work will follow established QA/QC protocols consistent with state and
commercial laboratory standards.
Task 5 – Reporting and Knowledge Transfer
· Prepare a Draft and Final PFAS Study Report summarizing:
· Findings from the literature review and desktop source identification.
· Rainwater sampling results and PFAS profiles.
· Interpretation of results in the context of PFAS sources relevant to the Deer Creek
CARA.
· Practical, non-prescriptive recommendations for source control, mitigation, monitoring,
and stormwater management consistent with the study scope and the City’s goal of
protecting the aquifer from PFAS contamination.
· Participate in meetings with City staff to review findings and discuss implications.
· Present results to City Council and/or Planning Board, if requested.
· Provide final deliverables in PDF format.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 143/167
4
Schedule
Task Week 1 Week 2 Week 3-
7*
Week 8 Week 9 Week
10
Week 11 Week 12
Task 1
Task 2
Deliverable 1 Draft Final
Task 3
Task 4
Deliverable 2
Task 5
Final Report
* Tentative date, pending rain events and City confirmation.
Deliverables
1. Literature Review Report (draft and final)
2. Rainwater Sampling Results Report
3. Final PFAS Study Report with recommendations
Budget
· Budget: Not to exceed $50,000, with ~$7,000 reserved for analytical costs and ~$39,000
for labor, fieldwork, and reporting.
Team Member
Hourly
Rate Hours Cost
PM PM $250.00 20 $5,000.00
Data Manager Abbi Brown $90.00 $-
PFAS Technical Lead Mahsa Modiri $215.00 42 $9,030.00
PFAS Fate and Treatment
Expert Pavan Challa $165.00 130 $21,450.00
Permit Compliance Lead Matt Prasek $230.00 10 $2,300.00
Modeler Lucas Reif $180.00 $-
Technical Editor Eric Brune $110.00 8 $880
Field Sampling Lead Tyler Pruett $150.00 44 $6,600.00
Field Sampler Drew Roberts $125.00 24 $3,000.00
Labor Total $42,100.00
Analytical $295.00 5 $1,475.00
ODC Markup 10% $147.50
Analytical Total $1,622.50
Grand Total $49,882.50
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 144/167
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
cz
cc
_
2
5
-08
9
5
7
-00
1
_
t
m
_
c
a
r
a
i
n
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
_
2
0
2
6
0
2
0
5
.
d
o
c
x
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 | Seattle, WA 98121 206.441.9080 herrerainc.com
WASHINGTON | OREGON | CALIFORNIA | MONTANA | WYOMING
Date: February 5, 2026
To: Andy Rheaume, City of Edmonds
From: Matt Fontaine and Stacy Luell, Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Subject: Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
Introduction
On January 6, 2026, the Edmonds City Council passed revisions to the Community Development Code
Chapter 23.10 Environmentally Critical Areas, which includes revisions to Article II. Critical Aquifer Recharge
Areas (CARA code). The City of Edmonds (City) has asked Herrera Environmental Consultants (Herrera) to consider how the changes to the CARA code may affect development and stormwater management requirements in the City, as well as the types of projects that may be affected by the CARA code changes.
The City has also requested a rough order-of-magnitude cost estimate for the City to perform
engineering studies in each basin that would be affected by the revisions to the CARA code. The studies
would define alternatives to stormwater infiltration best management practices (BMPs), such as new conveyance pipe and pump stations, that would be required to manage stormwater in areas where infiltration BMPs are prohibited.
We understand that the City has undertaken a Deer Creek PFAS/CARA study that is intended to provide
the best available science related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and groundwater. This technical memorandum does not address the health risk posed by PFAS in the environment or the ability of stormwater practices to reduce PFAS in stormwater.
Herrera Qualifications
Founded in 1980, Herrera is a recognized expert in surface water and stormwater management in Washington. Our standout expertise in stormwater management is built on more than four decades of Puget Sound experience in stormwater research, design, policy development, science, and planning.
Herrera has supported municipal stormwater management for 45 years and over 50 percent of Western Washington municipalities have chosen Herrera to support their stormwater programs, including the City of Edmonds. Herrera helped develop the City’s Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan (Storm Comp Plan) in 2010 and is currently working on completing the Storm Comp Plan update. Herrera helped
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 145/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
2 February 2026
the City develop the stormwater requirements of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 18.30 and the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum.
The following staff wrote this technical memorandum, and a summary of their qualifications is provided:
Matt Fontaine, PE
Matt Fontaine has 20 years of experience in stormwater planning, stormwater design, and stream restoration, throughout Western Washington. Matt has led a wide variety of stormwater projects for
public and private clients, ranging from small technical analyses to large-scale and complex watershed planning efforts. In the past ten years, he has supported stormwater program and regulatory development for the cities of Bremerton, Edgewood, Edmonds, Federal Way, Lacey, Lynnwood, Pasco, Port Angeles, Port Orchard and Kitsap and Thurston counties. Matt also designs stormwater BMPs so he
understands how regulations affect stormwater BMP design. He designed two award winning stormwater
parks in Washington: the Albany Street Stormwater Loop in Rochester, which won the APWA National Project of the Year, and the Chambers Lake Regional Stormwater Facility in Lacey, which won the ACEC Best in State Silver Award. He is currently leading the capital project portion of the City’s Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan Update.
Stacy Luell, PE
Stacy Luell, PE, QSD/QSP is a Professional Engineer in the state of California. She has 14 years of experience in MS4 Permit and water quality objective compliance, Construction General Permit compliance, Enhanced Watershed Management program support, hydrology, stormwater BMP
inspections and performance evaluations, stormwater management, and surface water and BMP
modeling. Stacy is currently leading various tasks for the City’s Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan Update and supported development of the City’s Stormwater Management Action Plan.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 146/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
3 February 2026
Revisions to CARA Code
Edmonds Community Development Code Title 23
The adopted 2026 revision to CARA Code Chapter 23.10.420.A Regulated Activities states:
The use of stormwater infiltration best management practices (BMPs), including those that qualify as a Class V underground injection control well (UIC), are prohibited for all land uses within all wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) associated with Olympic View Water and Sewer District’s (OVWSD) 228th Street Wellhead and the Deer Creek Springs Wellhead area [emphasis added], including their buffers.
Prior to the revision, Chapter 23.60.030.A Regulated Activities of the CARA code already prohibited the use of infiltration BMPs in the 228th Street Wellhead Protection area. These prohibitions are new to the Deer Creek Springs Wellhead area and buffer (Deer Creek Springs CARA) with the 2026 update. It can therefore be assumed that the CARA Code now applies to the Deer Creek Springs CARA in the same manner that it applies to the 228th Street CARA, and that the same infiltration BMPs are prohibited in both areas.
What does it mean to prohibit the use of infiltration BMPs?
The primary change to the CARA code that is evaluated in this memorandum is the prohibition of infiltration BMPs in the Deer Creek Springs CARA. The CARA code does not provide a definition of “infiltration BMPs,” but the City’s stormwater regulations reference the 2019 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (2019 Ecology Manual). The definition in Volume V of the 2019 Ecology Manual will therefore be used in this analysis:
“Infiltration BMP: An infiltration BMP is typically an impoundment; such as a basin, trench, or bioretention swale whose soil may remove pollutants from stormwater. Permeable pavement is a non-impoundment type of infiltration BMP. Stormwater dry-wells receiving uncontaminated or properly treated stormwater can also be considered an infiltration BMP.”
By this definition, rain gardens and rock trenches that manage runoff from roofs and driveways are also infiltration BMPs. However, 33 of the 40 permanent stormwater management BMPs included in the 2019 Ecology Manual involve infiltration—including Post Construction Soil Quality and Depth, which is required on all projects with over 2,000 square feet of new and replaced hard surface, as well as multiple Dispersion BMPs. In addition, some areas within the Deer Creek Springs CARA rely entirely on infiltration and evaporation for stormwater management. For example, in Southwest Edmonds A watershed, all stormwater infiltrates naturally or through private infiltration BMPs and City infiltration BMPs. Several of these areas already have nuisance flooding issues due to aging or undersized infiltration BMPs.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 147/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
4 February 2026
Will infiltration BMPs be allowed with measures to minimize impacts?
Multiple sections in ECDC Title 23, including ECDC 23.10.040, 23.10.250, and 23.10.420.D, outline
requirements to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas. The following excerpt from ECDC 23.10.420.D highlights some of these requirements.
As adopted, the prohibition of infiltration BMPs in the CARA code makes it unclear if the “avoid, minimize, and mitigate” sequence is to be used by staff in evaluating development applications and
building permits. It is also unclear whether installing stormwater treatment BMPs (or similar technologies) upstream of infiltration BMPs will be considered adequate to minimize impacts to the Deer Creek Springs CARA if they fulfill the requirement of ECDC 23.10.420.D.
This evaluation has assumed that infiltration BMPs will not be allowed, even when infiltration BMPs are
included in a mitigation plan that is part of a hydrogeologic report.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 148/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
5 February 2026
Impacts of CARA Code Changes on Development
Which projects will be affected by the CARA code change and how will they be affected?
The CARA code is applicable to all projects that require a permit or authorization from the City. However, not all projects require stormwater management. The Deer Creek Springs CARA and buffer include primarily low density residential and related land uses with some multifamily residential, mixed use, general commercial, and neighborhood center and hubs land uses. Stormwater requirements for these projects generally increase with project size. Table 1 summarizes how the CARA code changes may affect several example projects.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 149/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
6 February 2026
Table 1. Potential Effects of CARA Code Changes on Example Projects.a
Project Sizeb Examplesc Primary Stormwater Requirementsd Effects of Revised CARA Codee
Projects that do not create new or replaced hard surface or disturb the ground surface
Interior remodeling, roof replacement, mechanical system replacement, No stormwater requirements None
Small: Less than 2,000 square feet of new plus replaced hard surface with ground disturbing activities
Small to medium residential projects will fall in this category. Examples include building additions, decks or patios, fences, adding or replacing a driveway or walkway, and building a carport, garage, or accessory dwelling unit
Control pollution during construction ● Without infiltration BMPs, controlling polluted water on site may be more difficult. Builders may need to spend more money to collect and treat construction stormwater, such as piping or pumping it to the nearest storm drain or transporting it offsite. Many existing residential lots manage stormwater with infiltration BMPs. When these sites redevelop without infiltration BMPs, stormwater will flow off the site. The natural flow path (i.e., gravity flow) will either be towards neighboring properties or City streets. The cumulative impact of this runoff may cause flooding of properties and streets. Legal action between downstream and upstream property owners may become more common.
Medium: Between 2,000 and 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced hard surfaces
● Medium to large residential projects such as new homes. ● Smaller non-residential projects. ● Road projects that include very little new hard surface.f
All of the above plus:
● Maintain natural drainage patterns ● Use infiltration BMPs or detention vaults/pipes/tanks, if feasible
All of the above plus:
● Where there is a drainage system present, a detention vault / pipe / tank will be required, which will increase the project cost relative to use of infiltration BMPs. Use of detention will also increase the volume of flow that is discharged to the downstream drainage system and water bodies. ● Where there is no drainage system present, stormwater will flow off the site un-detained. ● Uncontrolled runoff may cause more significant adverse impacts to downstream receiving waters and downgradient properties than smaller projects. Stormwater requirements prohibit significant adverse impact to downstream receiving waters and downgradient properties.
Large: Over 5,000 square feet of new plus replaced hard surface area ● Many multifamily residential, mixed use, general commercial, and neighborhood center and hubs. ● Road projects that create new sidewalks or additional lanes.f
All of the above plus:
● Install water quality BMPs ● Install flow control BMPs
All of the above plus:
● Because water quality and flow control BMPs are below grade they need to discharge into deeper underground piping when infiltration is not allowed. In some locations, development is infeasible unless City conveyance systems are extended or pumps are used.
a This table contains typical examples and is intended to illustrate the potential effects of the revised CARA code on stormwater management. Because the range of potential project types and stormwater management solutions are broad and the stormwater management requirements are extensive, this table is not intended to be comprehensive or used as a decision-making tool.
b In an urban setting, creation of new and replaced hard surfaces, such as roofs and pavement, is the primary consideration when determining which stormwater requirements apply.
c Examples are provided to illustrate potential scenarios and not intended to be comprehensive.
d This column indicates the minimum requirements that can be expected to have the greatest influence on required stormwater BMPs and project feasibility considerations.
e This list is focused on some of the primary ways development may become more difficult or cost prohibitive in the Deer Creek Springs Wellhead area and buffer because of the revised CARA code.
f Thresholds for determining stormwater requirements for road projects have some differences from thresholds for parcel-based projects.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 150/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
7 February 2026
Why does this change present a problem for residents and development?
Two characteristics of the Deer Creek Springs CARA within the City limits make it challenging to meet stormwater requirements without infiltration BMPs:
1. Many of the roadways (approximately 30 percent) are not directly associated with stormwater conveyance piping to which a new or redevelopment project could easily connect. An additional 8 percent convey stormwater using ditches, which allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground.
a. Without infiltration BMPs, most developments will need to discharge stormwater to adjacent properties or the right-of-way. Since a large percentage of the right-of-way does not connect directly to a stormwater conveyance system, this discharge has the potential to cause significant adverse impacts to downgradient properties as it flows to the next nearest storm drain inlet, which would violate stormwater requirements. Additionally, the next nearest storm drain inlet and pipe network may not be appropriately sized to withstand the new increase in runoff volume.
b. Water quality and flow control BMPs typically require an underground conveyance system to which they discharge, so development may be infeasible at large sites unless conveyance systems are extended or stormwater is pumped from these BMPs onto the City streets.
These problems could be alleviated by replacing existing stormwater infiltration systems with conveyance throughout the Deer Creek Springs CARA . The conveyance could be constructed by City-funded or developer-funded projects. City projects could be funded by existing stormwater rate payers (i.e., fees from all properties in the City) or by establishing a district that charges an additional stormwater system improvement fee to properties in the Deer Creek Springs CARA. This issue is discussed further in the Basin Studies section.
2. The area has several closed depressions (i.e., areas where there is no natural or constructed stormwater outlet). As new development or redevelopment occurs in these areas, existing infiltration will be eliminated, and conveyance systems and pumps may be needed in each of these closed depression areas. Pumping water out of closed depressions and into adjacent drainage basins violates stormwater requirements to preserve natural drainage systems and may violate water rights laws or other regulations related to inter-basin transfers of surface water1. Conveyance and pumping are discussed further in the Basin Studies section.
In contrast, the 228th Street Wellhead Protection area has stormwater conveyance piping in most streets, so the properties can manage stormwater using non-infiltrating BMPs and discharge into the stormwater drainage system.
1 Evaluation of the relationship between CARA code changes and water rights regulations is outside of the scope of this technical memorandum.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 151/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
8 February 2026
Basin Studies
Identifying new or retrofitted conveyance infrastructure necessary to manage stormwater in the absence
of infiltration would require basin studies for the affected areas. A general basin study approach to lay out these new conveyance systems and evaluate impacts to existing downstream conveyance systems would include:
1. Identifying areas within the Deer Creek Springs CARA where there currently is no stormwater
conveyance system or where stormwater management currently relies on infiltration BMPs;
2. Laying out and sizing proposed or retrofitted stormwater conveyance systems within identified areas (basic engineering, not 100% design);
3. Developing basin hydrologic and hydraulic models to evaluate impacts of additional stormwater
runoff contributions on existing stormwater conveyance systems;
4. Identifying necessary existing conveyance system capital improvements to accommodate additional stormwater runoff contributions;
5. Developing documentation (i.e., a basin study) detailing proposed conveyance systems and necessary capital improvements, and estimated costs; and
6. Approval from State regulatory agencies and tribes.
A summary of basin-specific details for each of the basin studies is outlined below.
Southwest Edmonds A Basin
The Southwest Edmonds A basin has the following characteristics:
● The basin is 124 acres; 93 acres are located in the City of Edmonds and the Deer Creek Springs CARA.
● Current stormwater management is 100 percent infiltration, and there is no system to convey water to a surface water body.
● The southern portion of this basin is located within the Deer Creek Springs CARA and would likely
need to drain west to the City of Woodway (if infiltration is prohibited), so evaluation of impacts to the City of Woodway stormwater conveyance system would be needed.
● This study would include small portions of the Southwest Edmonds B and Puget Sound basins.
The order of magnitude cost for the Southwest Edmonds A basin study is $400,000.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 152/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
9 February 2026
Deer Creek Basin
The Deer Creek basin has the following characteristics:
● The basin is 224 acres; 68 acres are located in the City of Edmonds and the Deer Creek Springs CARA.
● The basin requires evaluation of potential impacts to 0.7 mile of Deer Creek downstream of the City
of Edmonds within the City of Woodway.
● Deer Creek and infrastructure in and near the stream could be adversely affected by increased flow rates and erosion, as properties in the watershed redevelop and eliminate existing infiltration systems.
The order of magnitude cost for the Deer Creek basin study is $500,000.
Edmonds Way Basin
The Edmonds Way basin has the following characteristics:
● The basin is 873 acres; 274 acres are located in the City of Edmonds and the Deer Creek Springs
CARA.
● The basin requires evaluation of 2.0 miles of conveyance pipe downstream of the Deer Creek Springs CARA.
● Existing stormwater infiltration in the southeast portion of this basin may need to drain to the Lake Ballinger basin, which would require additional evaluation to identify potential impacts and
proposed solutions.
The order of magnitude cost for the Edmonds Way basin is $500,000.
Cost Summary
The total estimated order of magnitude cost for all three basin studies (Southwest Edmonds A, Deer
Creek, and Edmonds Way) is $1,400,000.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 153/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
10 February 2026
Recommendations
The analysis herein has been conducted to the extent reasonable, given the information available in the
cited documents. From this analysis, Herrera makes the following recommendations:
● Clarify the definition of infiltration BMPs and the extent of their prohibition in the context of the revised CARA code.
● Clarify whether stormwater treatment BMPs (or similar technologies) upstream of infiltration BMPs
will be considered adequate to minimize impacts to the Deer Creek Springs CARA if they fulfill the
requirement of ECDC 23.10.420.D.
● Not allowing infiltration BMPs in the Deer Creek Springs CARA may require pumping water from one drainage basin to another. The City will need to consider the regulatory implications of this approach, such as whether these actions would violate water rights laws or other regulations related to inter-basin transfers of surface water.
● After completing the first three recommendations, determine whether prohibition of infiltration
BMPs in the Deer Creek Springs CARA could be considered a taking of reasonable economic use.
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 154/167
Technical Memorandum (continued) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Update Impacts to Stormwater Management in the City of Edmonds
11 February 2026
QC Check/Review Record
Revision Date Description By (Author) Review (Technical) Review (PM) Approved (CSR) Publications
00 2/5/26
TM: CARA Update Impacts to Stormwater Management
SL RD SL MF CZ
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 155/167
(Critical Aquifer Recharge Area)
City Council Meeting
February 3, 2026
Mike Clugston, P&D Director
Draft Moratorium
in Deer Creek
CARA
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 156/167
2CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Six-Month Moratorium on Applications
that Require Stormwater Management
1
2
Staff
Recommendation
3
4
Further evaluate stormwater management
alternatives in the area
Consider potential amendment to
CARA/stormwater regs based on study, if
needed
Avoid processing futile applications
Allow time to complete the Deer Creek PFAS study
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 157/167
3CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
ECDC 23.10.420.A - Stormwater
New code completely prohibits stormwater
from going into the ground in Deer Creek
228th Street has existing municipal
stormwater infrastructure (piping off-site
ok)
Deer Creek does not have good stormwater
infrastructure (piping off-site difficult)
Without the ability to manage stormwater
onsite, development/redevelopment in
Deer Creek becomes difficult, if not
impossible
Code Issue The use of stormwater
infiltration best
management practices
(BMPs), including those that
qualify as a class V
underground injection
control well (UIC) are
prohibited for all land uses
within… the Deer Creek and
the 228th Street CARAs
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 158/167
4CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Per ECDC 18.30 and the 2019
Ecology Stormwater Manual:
An infiltration BMP is typically an
impoundment, such as a basin, trench,
or bioretention swale, whose soil may
remove pollutants from stormwater.
Permeable pavement is a non-
impoundment type of infiltration BMP.
Rain gardens and rock trenches
managing runoff from roofs and
driveways receiving uncontaminated or
properly treated stormwater are
considered an infiltration BMPs.
What are
stormwater
infiltration
BMPs?
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 159/167
5CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Anything that requires
stormwater management…
Subdivisions
Building permits for mixed use,
multifamily, SFRs, ADUs, additions,
driveways, decks, patios –anything
that involves new or replaced
impervious hard surface
City projects that involve stormwater
management
What types of
projects will
be hard to
permit in Deer
Creek?
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 160/167
6CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Anything that DOES NOT require
stormwater management…
Interior remodels
Reroofs
Mechanical equipment
Fences
What can
still be easily
permitted in
Deer Creek?
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 161/167
7CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
No, ALL stormwater infiltration
BMPs are specifically prohibited in
Deer Creek per ECDC 23.10.420.A
A hydro report cannot recommend
any other infiltration options
because those would be counter to
the Best Available Science used to
establish the infiltration prohibition
Can’t
stormwater
infiltration be
allowed through
submittal of a
hydrogeological
report?
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 162/167
8CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Reasonable Economic Use
Variance - ECDC 23.10.280 - NO
Two previous approvals for vacant sites
where stream/wetland buffers covered the
entire project area
Small footprint of new development was
approved, together with compensatory
mitigation (i.e. native replanting, invasive
removal)
Not appropriate for existing developed sites
looking to expand
Not appropriate for Deer Creek CARA
where stormwater BMPs are prohibited
Other Possible
Off-Ramps?
Any permit requests would fail to meet the
Review Criteria in ECDC 23.10.230 and the
Mitigation Requirements and Sequencing
standards in ECDC 23.10.250
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 163/167
9CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
Notes on several Permitting webpages
Whether or not a moratorium is approved,
could send a letter to residents in Deer
Creek notifying them of the challenges (or
the applicability of the moratorium)
How are
residents /
applicants
being informed
of the
permitting
challenges in
Deer Creek?
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 164/167
10CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
1
2
Alternative 1
– No
Moratorium
Con – No clear pathway to approval for projects
needing stormwater infiltration while still
incurring permit costs; increases legal and
procedural risk associated with permit denial;
expends staff time processing futile applications
Pro - Avoids controversy and other modest risks
associated with moratoria
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 165/167
11CITY OF EDMONDS Draft Deer Creek Moratorium
1
2
Alternative 2
– Adopt Six
month
Moratorium
Con – Moratoria can be controversial and carry
inherent, modest, legal and policy risks
Pro - Provides regulatory clarity over the short
term; prevents owners from paying permit fees
when there is no feasible approval pathway;
allows future decisions to be informed by
completed scientific study; consistent with
precautionary approach that motivated the
adoption of the CARA regulations, while
avoiding premature permanent regulation
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 166/167
Discussion
If Council is in general support, staff can provide additional context and
answer questions on or before February 10 prior to possible adoption
Item 9.2
Packet pg. 167/167