Loading...
2015.12.08 CC Agenda Packet              AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers ~ Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WORK MEETING DECEMBER 8, 2015             7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE   1.Roll Call   2.(5 Minutes)Approval of Agenda   3.(5 Minutes)Approval of Consent Agenda Items   A.AM-8178 Approval of draft City Council Meeting Minutes of November 20th, November 24th, and December 1st, 2015.   B.AM-8174 Approval of claim checks #217395 through #217508 dated December 3, 2015 for $547,158.83. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #61974 through #61985 for $495,324.94, benefit checks #61986 through #61993 and wire payments of $546,088.13 for the pay period November 16, 2015 to November 30, 2015.   C.AM-8173 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from William Martenson ($1,000.00)   4.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings   5.PUBLIC HEARING   A.(60 Minutes) AM-8169 Public Hearing* and Potential Action on Ordinance Banning Installation of Crumb Rubber on Publicly Owned Athletic Fields within City Limits for One Year *Public comments will be limited to 2-minutes per person   6.ACTION ITEMS       Packet Page 1 of 229   A.(60 Minutes) AM-8175 Continued Deliberations and Adoption of 2016 Budget, including the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element of the Comprehensive Plan.   B.(20 Minutes) AM-8177 Continued Deliberations and Adoption of the Proposed Capital Improvement Program.   C.(5 Minutes) AM-8170 Authorization to Execute Professional Services Agreement for Highway 99 Subarea Planning Project.   7.(5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments   8.(15 Minutes)Council Comments   9.Convene in executive session regarding pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).   10.Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session.   ADJOURN         Packet Page 2 of 229    AM-8178     3. A.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Scott Passey Department:City Clerk's Office Type: Action  Information Subject Title Approval of draft City Council Meeting Minutes of November 20th, November 24th, and December 1st, 2015. Recommendation  Review and approve meeting minutes. Previous Council Action  N/A Narrative Attachment 1 - 11-20-15 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Attachment 2 - 11-24-15 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Attachment 3 - 12-01-15 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Attachments Attachment 1 - 11-20-15 Draft Council Meeting minutes Attachment 2 - 11-24-15 Draft Council Meeting minutes Attachment 3 - 12-01-15 Draft Council Meeting minutes Form Review Form Started By: Scott Passey Started On: 12/03/2015 03:00 PM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 3 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2015 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES Special Meeting November 20, 2015 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS PARTICIPATING BY SPEAKERPHONE Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk 1. CALL TO ORDER The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Fourtner Room, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. AMENDMENT TO THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR CIVIC FIELD Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director, explained that the school district attorney contacted the City to say that the district has not yet provided the required notices to the public about its intention to sell the property and also has not yet held a public hearing. Therefore, ESD is requesting an amendment to allow them to complete their required process. The school board will consider signing the purchase and sale agreement, and the amendment, at their Nov. 24 meeting. She concluded that having the district sign the amendment Nov. 24 will ensure it can be delivered to escrow on Nov. 25, and lock in the $1.9 million purchase price. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURN Packet Page 4 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2015 Page 2 With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 3:09 p.m. Packet Page 5 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES Special Meeting November 24, 2015 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief R. Barker, Police Officer Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder Mayor Earling advised that he swore in Councilmembers Mesaros and Nelson prior to the meeting. The election was certified today at 1:00 p.m. and since both were appointed, they needed to be sworn in to participate in tonight’s meeting. 1. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO MOVE ITEM 3G, WDFW GRANT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT AUTHORIZATION, TO 6G AND MOVE 6G, FISHING PIER REHABILITATION PROJECT BID AUTHORIZATION, TO 3G. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bloom referred to Item 5A, recalling last week there were two public hearings, one regarding revenue sources including adoption of a Substantial Need Resolution and property taxes and a second regarding the budget. She asked whether public comment would be taken at another meeting regarding the budget since it is not listed on tonight’s agenda. Finance Director Scott James said public hearings were noticed for both, property taxes and the budget and they were combined into one agenda item. Councilmember Bloom pointed out Item 5A does not refer to public comment regarding the budget, only revenue sources and adoption of the Substantial Need Resolution. She asked if there would be Packet Page 6 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 2 another opportunity for public comment specifically regarding the budget. Mr. James advised a second public hearing on the budget is scheduled next week. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what the public notice stated. City Clerk Scott Passey explained the originally public notice stated public hearings on the 2016 budget will be held on November 17th and 24th and the public hearing on the proposed 2016 property levy will be held on November 17th. The November 17th meeting was subsequently cancelled so the public hearing was re-noticed for tonight to focus on revenue sources. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed the agenda item did not specify the items on which public comment would be taken. Mr. Passey acknowledged the agenda should have included the budget and 2016 revenues sources. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2015 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #217122 THROUGH #217223 DATED NOVEMBER 12, 2015 FOR $1,446,322.35. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL CHECK #61861 FOR $468.57 FOR THE PAY PERIOD OCTOBER 16, 2015 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2015 C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #217224 THROUGH #217340 DATED NOVEMBER 19, 2015 FOR $1,020,393.59. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #61862 THROUGH #61873 FOR $486,020.88, BENEFIT CHECKS #61874 THROUGH #61878 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $524,040.78 FOR THE PAY PERIOD NOVEMBER 1, 2015 THROUGH NOVEMBER 15, 2015 D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM RICHARD ZINKAND ($5,896.13) E. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN RIGHT OF WAY DOCUMENTS FROM EDMONDS-WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL FOR THE 76TH AND 212TH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS F. COUNCIL CHAMBERS A/V UPGRADES PROJECT G. FISHING PIER REHABILITATION PROJECT BID AUTHORIZATION 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jenny Anttila, Edmonds, said Edmonds is one of most liberal cities in the area with regard to parking including Mukilteo, Lynnwood and Kirkland. She did not object to 3-4 hour parking limits but suggested the salary of a full-time parking enforcement officer could be funded via parking enforcement. She clarified she was not suggesting meters but noted several areas have no parking restrictions such as 6th Avenue or near City Hall where people park all weekend and take the ferry. She also referred to Sunset Avenue where there is a 4-hour parking limit; however, due to lack of enforcement, people park for 7-8 hours, taking their golf clubs onto the ferry. She objected to the lack of parking enforcement and Packet Page 7 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 3 suggested a multistory city car park at the 3rd Avenue Park. She suggested the City establish a parking policy or plan, fearing the parking situation which is bad enough now will get worse in the next two years. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, spoke regarding traffic enforcement, noting the agenda references only revenues and he was unclear when to speak regarding expenses. During the past year the City Council has spent considerable time on crumb rubber and finding a safer access to the waterfront, two very important issues. However, crumb rubber and access to the waterfront are both are potential causes of death; traffic is a current cause of injury and death, yet the Council has not spent any time addressing that issue. Two pedestrian were killed in 2014 but the 2015 budget included no action to address that situation. There have been 31 additional vehicle/pedestrian accidents since the beginning of 2014 through Oct 2015 and an additional accident occurred last week; an average of 1 pedestrian hit by a vehicle every 3 weeks. At the last Council meeting, Councilmember Nelson inquired about resources devoted to traffic enforcement; regardless of the number devoted to traffic control, it is obviously adequate. Too many drivers driving imprudently, speeding, rolling through stop signs, parking too close to stop signs and crosswalks, making turns into the wrong traffic lane, failure to use turn signals, and failure to give the right-of-way to pedestrian in crosswalks. The state of the City’s traffic needs Council attention before the number of fatalities increase. He doubted this City Council wanted to be known as a Council that did not care about deaths on the streets. Adding a Council legislative assistant and easing the workload on the second floor should be a slower priority. He recalled having the permit center closed on Wednesdays was not a precedent; it had also been closed on Wednesdays during the last construction bubble. He urged the Council to elevate the importance of traffic enforcement. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Mr. Wambolt’s comments, pointing out drivers in Edmonds are getting older which may be part of the accident problem. He recalled at the November 10th meeting City Attorney Jeff Taraday was asked about the letter from Edmonds School District regarding the ban on crumb rubber to which Mr. Taraday responded he had not had an opportunity to scrutinize it although it had been sent on November 6th. Mr. Hertrich’s review of the District’s letter found great emphasis on the District’s ability to implement its educational programs; he did not feel health was related to educational programs. The District’s letter states they provide for the health and safety of students; however, the City is responsible for the health of all citizens. The letter states the City has the right to limit setbacks, etc. but does not address the City’s attempt to regulate health. Most of the District comments were in regard to obstruction of anything related to the educational process; he did not view that the Council’s efforts to limit crumb rubber as having anything to do with educational process. He looked forward to the Council having a discussion with the City Attorney in public, noting the public has not seen the District’s letter. Next, he objected to Council President Fraley-Monillas’ comments in newspaper, “The emotional issue should not be decided on who yells the loudest, makes the most threats and objects the most.” He did not recall any of those things had occurred when citizens spoke. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2016 BUDGET REVENUE SOURCES, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL NEED RESOLUTION AND THE 2016 PROPERTY TAX LEVY ORDINANCE Finance Director Scott James provided an overview of tonight’s 2016 budget and property tax agenda items. 1. Open public hearing 2. Accept public comment 3. Staff presentation on property taxes 4. Council will be asked to approve a Substantial Need Resolution 5. Council will be asked to approve the 2016 Property Tax Ordinance Packet Page 8 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 4 6. Staff will present recommended changes to 2016 budget decision packages 7. Council resume discussion of the 2016 budget 8. Continue the public hearing to December 1, 2015 Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Jeff Sheerer, Edmonds, said he was not against taxes but was speaking for the hardworking families whose wages are not going up and the people who receive social security whose benefits are not increasing. He imagined a more efficient, effective and accountable government that uses common sense approaches. Hardworking taxpayers deserve a government that delivers what it promises and with regard to taxes, a government that takes not a penny more than it spends or needs because that’s how families operate their budgets. When deciding whether to increase property taxes, he suggested the Council consider that an increase in property taxes puts affordable housing further from reach. Working wages are not increasing and people on fixed incomes and social security are not receiving cost of living increases this year. Voters just approved a limit on tax increases in Olympia and a proposition to increase retail sales and use tax is narrowly passing. Next year Sound Transit plans to propose raising sales tax on most Snohomish County residents by ½%, raise the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax and impose a new property tax for light rail. Increasing property taxes deals working families an added burden; working families must live within their available income and the City should do same. He urged the Council to go back to work on the budget and not raise property taxes. Senator Maralyn Chase, Edmonds, thanked Councilmembers for the courtesy, respect and dignity with which they have handled the crumb rubber issue. She acknowledged proponents of the crumb rubber issue are excited and may occasionally engage in inappropriate behavior, but everyone felt the Council had given them a fair hearing. Next, she asked for the Council’s help; the legislature will be dealing with budgets in Olympia. The Public Works Trust Fund was swept and put in the Education Legacy Account, money that should have gone to help cities with infrastructure costs. She was hopeful the City could address cities’ needs from the point of view that infrastructure must be provided in order to grow the economy. She distributed packets of information regarding income growth, income and equality, and taxes that shows Washington has the most regressive tax structure in entire United States. Cities are starved for resources and tax reform is needed. From 1979 to 2012 the income of the majority of people went down 3%. There is an economic crisis with regard to taxes and the need for more taxes and the inability to squeeze it out of the budget. She offered to return to the Council at another time to discuss the information she distributed. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, said the City seemed to approve a 1% tax increase every year or put it on hold for another year. He recalled when he on City Council, the Council identified specific things that would be funded with the 1% increase. He suggested the Council identify a specific item that the 1% would fund such as chip seal. He pointed out Engineering and the Public Works Department have increased work on roads but they neglected to include chip seal. He suggested Edmonds be like Shoreline who has chip sealed 90% of their streets. He summarized chip seal is a very effective process and the City could get a lot for its money. He urged the Council to identify chip seal as the use for the 1% property tax increase. Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Mr. James provided the following information: • 2016 Budget Includes 1% Property Tax Increase • Assessor Shows City of Edmonds Assessed Values Increasing 8.22% (Increase in AV before adding in new construction) • New Construction adds $43.5 million Assessed Value Packet Page 9 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 5 He described the 2016 Regular Property Tax calculation for the City: Description Amount 2015 Levy Amount $9,970,971 Add New Construction 64,017 Add Allowance for Adjustments 9,553 Add Refunds 447 2016 Starting Point $10,044,988 Add 1% of 2015 Levy 99,710 Total 2016 Levy $10,144,698 Mr. James reviewed a graph of the 10 year assessed property values history for the City, advising 2016 marks the third consecutive year for increased property taxes in Edmonds following four years of declining assessed values. He highlighted assessed values of $6.6 billion in 2007, peaking at $7.7 billion in 2009, declining to $5.5 billion in 2013 and increasing to over $7.3 billion in 2016. He provided a graph of the rate per $1,000 of assessed value history, highlighting a rate of $1.33 in 2007, $1.19 in 2009, peaking at $1.76 in 2013 and decreasing to an estimated $1.37 in 2016. He noted placing the graphs side by side illustrates an inverse relationship; as assessed values go down, tax rates increase. He provided an overview of the 2008 – 2016 EMS Tax Levy: • In 2008 citizens voted to make the EMS Levy a permanent $0.50 levy • During 2010 – 2013 assessed property values declined • During this span of time Edmonds assessed value dropped just over 31% • EMS levy cannot exceed $0.50 • In a declining assessed value environment the City’s EMS levy also declines Mr. James provided a comparison of EMS Tax Levy 2009-2016 Year Action EMS Levy Levy Savings 2009 $0.50 Permanent EMS Levy becomes effective $3,854,605 $0 2010 EMS Levy Declines 3,477,741 376,864 2011 EMS Levy Declines 3,216,629 637,976 2012 EMS Levy Declines 2,897,322 957,283 2013 EMS Levy Declines 2,772,620 1,081,985 2014 EMS Levy Increases 3,051,206 803,399 2015 EMS Levy Increases 3,395,376 459,229 2016 EMS Levy Increases $3,692,091 162,514 $4,486,883 He reviewed a graph of EMS Levy Rate per $1,000 of assessed value history, highlighting $0.36 in 2007, $0.32 in 2008, and permanent $0.50 levy effective in 2009. He described the 2016 EMS Property Tax calculation for the City: Description Amount 2015 Levy Amount $3,387,743 Add New Construction 21,750 Add Allowance for Adjustments 3,540 Add Refunds 460 2016 Levy 43,413,493 Add ”Banked Capacity” 278,598 Total 2016 Levy $3,692,091 Packet Page 10 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 6 Mr. James relayed 2016 will be the last year for Public Safety bond payment; the bond payment in 2016 will be $949,540. He described the impacts of tax increases: • 2015 Average Residence Value is $394,700 • 1% Regular Tax Levy Increase = $5.81 • Keeping EMS Levy at $0.50 = $16.22 • Average Residence would pay $22.03 in 2016, or about $1.84 per month extra He reviewed revisions to the proposed Substantial Need Resolution and the Property Tax Levy Ordinance: • Section 1 of Resolution: Pursuant to the foregoing finding of substantial need and pursuant to RCW 84.55.0101, the city council desires to increase to the City of Edmonds 2016 regular property tax levy by a limit factor of one hundred one percent (or 499,710). • Section 1 of Ordinance: The limit factor of the regular levy to be collected in budget year 2016 shall be limited to the 101% or 100% plus inflation, whichever is lower of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied in the City in any year since 1985. Mr. James described why the Substantial Need Resolution is on tonight’s agenda. Cities are allowed to levy an increase in property taxes by the lesser of 1% or the rate of inflation as measured by the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD). This year the rate of inflation as measured by IPD is 0.251%. Passing the Substantial Need Resolution will allow Edmonds to increase the property tax by the full 1% as allowed by RCW. Council passage of a Substantial Need Resolution requires a super majority vote. He displayed motions related to passage of the Substantial Need Resolution and the 2016 Property Tax Levy Ordinance: 1) To Approve Resolution No. XXXX Finding Substantial Need to Levy Property Taxes Using a Limit Factor of 101% Notwithstanding a Lower National Inflation Rate. 2) To Approve Ordinance No. XXXX Levying 1% Regular Property Tax Increase for 2016, Levying 8.2% EMS Tax Increase and Levying $949,540 for Public Safety Voted Debt for Public Safety Complex. Mayor Earling advised Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite needed to leave to attend an Edmonds School Board meeting; Council questions related to parks will need to be delayed until the next meeting. Councilmember Petso asked if the appropriate levy rate under State law would be 0.25% increase if the Council does not find the City has a substantial need at this time to levy the full 1%. Mr. James answered RCW allows cities to levy an increase in property taxes by 1% or the IPD rate which this year is 0.251%. The Substantial Need Resolution allows the Council the option of raising the levy by 1% as allowed by RCW. Councilmember Petso reiterated if the Council finds there is not a substantial need, either because savings have already been identified in the budget, and the budget includes ten new positions, funding for travel and training for Councilmembers, etc., a want-to rather than need to budget, the Council could not approve the Substantial Need Resolution and levy only 0.25%. Mr. James agreed. He pointed out things that support the substantial need: 1) The contract relationship with Fire District 1. The budget includes an estimated increase for 2016 of over $235,000. The City is still waiting for FD1 to settle with the bargaining unit. The $235,000 increase is a minimum 2) Salary and benefit increases for current staff total $225,000. 3) Edmonds has a very low tax rate, the fifth lowest in Snohomish County Mr. James summarized the FD1 increase and staff increases total $465,000 which alone justifies the substantial need. He noted the importance of meeting citizens’ needs; the proposed budget includes Packet Page 11 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 7 additional officers which are increased cost and also justify the $99,740 or $5.81/year for the average resident. In addition to $225,000 in increases for current staff, Councilmember Petso asked about the increased amount for 10 new employees. Mr. James estimated it was $680,000. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented the 1% increase is not just a one-time amount, it progresses into future years. Mr. James agreed. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what constituted a super majority when six Councilmembers were present. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said a super majority is majority plus one; a super majority of the seven member body is five even if not all Councilmembers are present. For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. James identified the ten new positions and departments: • Part-time Council legislative assistant • Finance Department staff accountant (DP #11) • Two officers for the Street Crime Unit (DP #23) • Full-time building inspector (DP #34) Development Services • Half-time permit coordinator (DP #35) Development Services • Half-time advance planner (DP #36) Development Services • Half-time arts assistant (DP #40) • Full-time custodian (DP #43) • Full-time construction inspector, 90% paid by Utilities and 10% from grants and General Fund (DP #44) • Part-time seasonal cemetery laborer, Utility Fund • Full-time water department employee (DP #59) Utility Fund • Stormwater employee (DP #61) Utility Fund Councilmember Bloom asked whether the list totaled ten positions. Mr. James answered the legislative assistant, permit coordinator, advance planer and arts assistant are part-time employees and the seasonal cemetery laborer is less than half-time. Councilmember Bloom asked which positions were paid by the Utility Fund. Mr. James advised the staff accountant position is paid by the General Fund but a portion is charged back via an overhead charge to the Utility Fund, nearly $37,000. The construction inspector is paid 90% by the Utility Fund and the stormwater and water department employees are also paid out of the Utility Fund. Councilmember Bloom explained she was asking about positions funded by the Utility Fund because the City significantly increased its utility taxes and will be considering another increase next year. Mr. James agreed the City has completed a series of three year increases, noting part of the purpose was to avoid issuing debt for utility projects. Councilmember Mesaros referred to the impacts of the tax increase, relaying if the Council approved the Substantial Need Resolution and the 2016 Property Tax Levy, an average homeowner of a property valued at $394,700 would pay an additional $1.84/month. Mr. James agreed. Councilmember Mesaros observed that additional tax burden was less than the price of a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Councilmember Johnson commented coffee at McDonald’s is only $1. She asked what year the Council banked capacity. Mr. James answered it was 2013. Councilmember Johnson asked the effect of banking capacity, whether it would be 1% less the 0.25% or 0.75%. Mr. James answered 1% is $99,710; refunds are deducted from the banked capacity, leaving approximately $99,300. Councilmember Johnson asked the effect of banking capacity. Mr. James answered banking means if the Council elected not to raise the property tax levy by 1%, the Council has the option of banking it for a future year, reserving the 1% to raise it at a later date. Packet Page 12 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 8 Councilmember Nelson asked how many of the ten positions are restoration of positions. Mr. James answered they were all restorations with the exception of the construction inspector and the legislative aid. Council President Fraley-Monillas noted citizens have mentioned chip seal, parking problems, more police for traffic control, affordable housing, and fire services. The proposed increase of $1.84/month is not an excessive amount to ask citizens to pay for services. As Senator Chase stated, Washington has a regressive tax system and the proposed amount is not too much to pay to allow the City to provide services to its citizens. Councilmember Petso explained the difficulty she faces is not the magnitude of the tax increase, obviously a 1% tax increase is not enormous, but the Council is being asked to find the City has substantial need to increase the property from the ¼% allowed by code to 1% and she did not feel there was a substantial need to do that. It did not matter what a citizen could buy with the additional $1.84; her concern was the City could not levy 1% unless the Council was willing to say the City has substantial need for 1% rather than being limited to ¼%. Councilmember Nelson asked whether the ordinance defined substantial need. Mr. James said the resolution identifies substantial need. The IPD rate was 0.251%; City staff COLAs were 1.6%. IPD is a measure of the change in gross domestic product which has very little correlation with the increase in the cost of goods and services. For example, the union increases are not based on IPD. Councilmember Nelson asked Mr. James whether he believed there was a substantial need for the increase. Mr. James answered absolutely, no question about it. One reason alone is the increase in the FD1 cost which will continue to exceed 1% every year so the City is already falling behind. The estimated $235,000 FD1 increase is an estimate; the 1% property tax increase would generate $99,700, a substantial gap. Added to that are staff salary increases of over $225,000. The City would like to add services that are currently deficient such as the Street Crimes Unit, a staff accountant in Financial Services and Development Services is closed one day a week which he questioned was the best way to offer services. Those items demonstrate loudly there is substantial need. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed substantial need is not defined in the statute. Mr. James displayed a definition of IPD vs. CPI: “A ratio of nominal GDP to real GDP expressed as a percentage. The GDP price deflator is used as a measure of the inflation rate; it does not account for price changes in commodity baskets like the Consumer Price Index. Rather it shows changes in GDP compared with a base year (1985).” He reiterated the IPD was not a good measure of year-to-year cost increases. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether Council could wait to adopt the Substantial Need Resolution and 2016 Property Tax Levy Ordinance until Councilmember Buckshnis returned, noting the Council has not heard from her regarding this topic. Mr. James recalled Councilmember Buckshnis was supportive of the budget as presented. The Council cannot wait to take action; the RCW-mandated deadline to pass the resolution and ordinance and get it to the County is November 30. Mr. Taraday advised the Council could wait if there were a special meeting during the day on November 30th but otherwise they cannot wait. Councilmember Bloom observed the difference is approximately $74,000. The property tax levy can be raised by ¼% without adopting the Substantial Need Resolution. Mr. James agreed, noting the Substantial Need Resolution still needs to be approved if the Council wanted to bank the $74,000. Councilmember Mesaros said in listening to this discussion and the public’s comments about the City’s needs in public safety and traffic control, the addition of individuals to the Police Department needs to be addressed by the Council. In developing this budget and attempting to restoring services that have been Packet Page 13 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 9 lost during the recession over the past several years, he felt there was substantial need. He did not believe $1.84/month on the average home was too burdensome to ask of citizens so that the City serve them to the best of its ability. Citizens are fortunate to live in a city that has been very prudent and has one of the lowest tax rates in Snohomish County. Even after passing the 1% property tax increase, Edmonds will continue to have one of lowest tax rates. After passing the increase, Councilmembers can look at citizens and say they are being good stewards of their resources and providing the best services possible for the dollars available. Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding the Substantial Need Resolution needed to be approved even if the Council chose to bank the capacity for a future year. Mr. James agreed. Councilmember Johnson said that would be a prudent course if there were not sufficient votes to increase the levy rate by 1% for 2016. For that reason and the reasons Mr. James explained, most particularly the FD1 increase which she anticipated would be more than 1% per year, she supported adoption of the Substantial Need Resolution. Mr. James referred to the 2009-2016 EMS Tax Levy, explaining citizens voted in 2008 for a levy of $3.8 million; the levy amount has decreased every subsequent year. The reductions directly impact the City’s ability to fund services. Citizens have experienced savings of $4.4 million due to decreased EMS levy since 2010. Councilmember Bloom found this a difficult decision because like Senator Chase said, Washington has a regressive tax system, not due to property tax but the lack of an income tax. There are a lot of seniors on fixed incomes in Edmonds; $1.84/month is not much but it continues to add up. She found it difficult to increase taxes while adding ten positions and did not see there was a substantial need. She preferred to do more belt-tightening and remove $75,000 somewhere in the budget. Councilmember Petso agreed with Councilmember Bloom, questioning the ability to demonstrate that $74,000 represented a substantial need. For example savings of $60,000 have already been identified in the PFD line item in the budget; she questioned whether the need now was only $14,000. She understood the City will need more money over the long term but the reason is not the willingness to find substantial need this year; it is hiring ten new employees and being limited to a 1% tax increase or pulling all the one time expenditures out of the General Fund. With this budget, there are no more capital projects in the General Fund that can that can be delayed or deferred. An additional $74,000 will not change that; it is a question of whether Councilmembers can leave tonight’s meeting and say with a straight face that the City had a substantial need for $74,000. She was intrigued by the idea of banking but that would also require adoption of the Substantial Need Resolution. Council President Fraley-Monillas said according to the resolution there is a substantial need. She reminded the $74,000 is not a one-time amount; it is collected year after year so the impact is more than just this year. She suggested banking the capacity into the future to allow for the possibility of collecting it in the future if there is consensus in the future that substantial need exists. She asked whether banking would also require a super majority vote. Mr. James answered a super majority is required to pass the Substantial Need Resolution. Councilmember Mesaros relayed he can say with a straight face that the City has a substantial need. Looking out beyond this year, the City’s revenue projections are bleak. He encouraged Councilmembers to look at 2016 as well as into the future. He feared not passing the 1% property tax levy increased would haunt the City for years to come. Councilmember Petso asked if the language of the Substantial Need Resolution could be tweaked to reference that a substantial need is found to bank the capacity. Mr. James said the resolution as presented, Packet Page 14 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 10 $99,700, needs to be passed. The Council would then have the opportunity raise the levy by 1% or bank it. For example if the Council wanted to approve the 1% increase, the resolution and ordinance could be passed as presented. If the Council wanted to bank the capacity, the Council would pass the resolution as presented and the ordinance would need to be modified to raise the property tax levy by 0.251% and bank the $74,000 difference or whatever amount the Council choses. Councilmember Petso asked whether the Council needed to state there was a current substantial need or could the language be modified to refer to a future substantial need. Mr. James said the resolution simply needs to state a substantial need and it could be justified however the Council wished. The ordinance must state the percentage rate increase and the dollar amount. Councilmember Petso asked whether the dollar amount appears in the resolution. Mr. James referred to the revision that added the dollar amount of $99,710. Councilmember Petso suggested returning to this later, suggesting staff draft language that states the Council did not find there was a substantial need for the 2016 budget but finds a substantial need to bank the capacity. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE MOTIONS PROPOSED BY STAFF AS PRESENTED. Councilmember Mesaros found there was substantial need for the 2016 budget as well as due to the impact in the next several years. He said it is time to act as a Council; he did not find the impact would be overly burdensome on citizens and it would allow the City to deliver services that citizens count on. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED TO ACHIEVE A SUPER MAJORITY (4-2); COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, MESAROS AND NELSON VOTING YES, AND COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM AND COUNCILMEMBER PETSO VOTING NO. Councilmember Petso reiterated her request to bring this back later on the agenda to allow staff to develop language for a Substantial Need Resolution that contemplated banking the property tax increase. It was the consensus of the Council to return to this later on the agenda. 6. STUDY ITEMS A. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ZACHOR & THOMAS, INC., P.S. FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SERVICES Sharon Cates, Lighthouse Law Group, explained Zachor & Thomas currently has an agreement with the City to provide prosecuting attorney services through the end of 2015; that agreement includes a provision that they negotiate with the City during 2016. Zachor & Thomas approached the City in July and presented a proposal for the 2016 calendar year. Zachor and Thomas had numerous concerns including the new Tuesday court calendar the Municipal Court Judge put in place in July, the City’s hiring of new defense counsel that they feared would substantially increase their workload as well as Washington State Supreme Court’s new standards for indigent defense. Zachor & Thomas provided their concerns during multiple meetings; many of their concerns were anticipatory, including that the new defense firm would create more work for them than the former defense firm under same standards. Ms. Cates explained the 2016 agreement that was eventually developed works well for City and staff recommends an RFQ process during 2016 to see what the market is for prosecuting attorney services. The proposed agreement also works for Zachor & Thomas; they originally requested an increase that would fund a full-time attorney, the City negotiated an increase that would cover half of an attorney. The Packet Page 15 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 11 proposed agreement also allows Zachor & Thomas to bill separately for the Tuesday calendar. The $12,000 for the court calendar has been added to the budget. Zachor & Thomas has been asked in recently years to do more review of charging decision; the agreement includes 125 reviews and reviews over that amount would be billed at their hourly rate with a cap of $150/case. Mayor Earling relayed staff has spent a lot of time negotiating the most respectable agreement that could possibly be reached. Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed interest in doing an RFQ in the coming year to investigate other firms. Ms. Cates agreed that is staff’s recommendation and it makes sense for the City to do. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented it has been a long time since the City has done an RFQ for prosecuting attorney services. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. B. EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT - EMERGENCY ACCESS KEY ILA Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless explained over the past several years the Police Department has had several keys that allow access to all the doors on District property. Given the sensitive nature of these keys, the District prepared an ILA outlining the responsibilities in maintaining the keys which has been approved by the District. Councilmember Petso took the opportunity to commend ACOP Lawless for his agenda memos, finding them clear and concise. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. C. YAKIMA COUNTY INMATE HOUSING AGREEMENT - ADDENDUM Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless reported in 2014 the City entered into an agreement with Yakima County to house inmates for longer term commitments. The City has several contracts with jail facilities, the primary being Snohomish County; they are often at maximum capacity. Yakima County has the ability to provide inmate housing for considerably less money. The City has an existing agreement with Yakima County so this is basically a renewal of the current agreement. Councilmember Nelson asked whether the agreement was only for housing of male inmates. ACOP Lawless answered the agreement includes specifications for housing and transportation of both male and female inmates. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. D. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC SECTIONS 5.32.107 AND 5.32.108 - SHELLFISH REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless said this will update the current language in the ordinance related to shellfish regulation and enforcement. Over the past 4-5 years the RCWs and WACs regarding these regulations have been revised; the City’s regulations have not been updated. The police department receives calls regularly during crabbing season calls; making these revisions to the code will prevent citing in South District. Fish & Wildlife often does not have staff available; these revisions will allow the City to take action if necessary. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. Packet Page 16 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 12 Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. E. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON DRAFT 2016 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty referred to the draft City of Edmonds 2016 State Legislative Agenda that lists items that would be actively pursued, Accelerate Funding for the SR 99 Edmonds Gateway Project and Capital Project Funding for the Frances Anderson Center, and several support items. He highlighted minor changes made since the legislative agenda in response to Council comments: • Added Support for Capital Project Funding for Edmonds Senior/Community Center • Added in the appendix, Environmental Issues (Monitor and potentially support environmental- protection measures, including those that would enhance the Puget Sound ecosystem, salmon recovery, drought management, toxics control and clean-up, as well as measures associated with climate change, crumb rubber athletic field infill, etc.) With regard to the items that will be monitored and potentially supported, Councilmember Petso asked whether Council would be alerted if there was a request to actively support those items. Mr. Doherty answered that has not necessarily been done in the past. It is usually expressed via adoption of the legislative agenda. If a majority of the Council did not want to potentially support an item, it should not be on the list. Councilmember Bloom asked how the Council will be updated during the legislative session, recalling there were frequent presentations to Council by the lobbyist in the past. Mr. Doherty said staff receives weekly memos from the lobbyist which could be summarized for Council. He commented the lobbyist’s memos can be very detailed and it may be more effective for staff to provide the highlights. Mayor Earling said if there are any major initiatives the Council needs to be apprised of, Council can be alerted to ensure they support the action being taken. For example, the appendix includes Human Services, Homelessness and Affordable Housing; he anticipated some action would begin in 2016 that may carry over into 2017. If a public hearing occurs, the City will ask the lobbyist to sign in as supportive. That it is not necessarily a front burner issue for Edmonds, but the City would be supportive. If it becomes a major piece of legislation, it would be brought to Council. Councilmember Bloom asked who receives the updates. Mr. Doherty said the Mayor and Directors receive weekly updates regarding the status of issues before the legislature; sometimes the lobbyist requests someone testify, sign in instead of the lobbyist, provide supporting information, etc. He reiterated the offer to compile periodic highlights for Council. Councilmember Bloom said that would be something to consider, commenting it would be helpful information for Councilmembers to have. Councilmember Johnson agreed, recalling the Council received no information from the lobbyist during the last session because the lobbyist, Jennifer Zeigler, lives in Olympia and it is inconvenient for her to make presentations like the former lobbyist did. She suggested staff copy the Council on the information they receive from the lobbyist. Mayor Earling said Ms. Zeigler would be agreeable to providing the Council one or two updates during the two month session. Councilmember Johnson said the Council did not need to make a decision tonight but there was interest by the Council in further discussion. Council President Fraley-Monillas said one of reasons she supported funds for Council travel in the budget was to allow Councilmembers to go to Olympia. Most of Councils in surrounding cities frequently go to Olympia to talk to their legislators and testify at hearings and Edmonds does not. Olympia is 92 miles one way; it would be nice for Council to have the ability to go to Olympia to assist with legislating for certain issues. Mr. Doherty said Mayor Earling and Directors go to Olympia on occasion. The more Packet Page 17 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 13 members of leadership that are present on key issues in Olympia, the better. Mayor Earling said when he goes to Olympia, he pays for the gas himself. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. F. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE OF CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (CEDC) Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty provided background: • June 2, 2009 Council passed ordinance 3735 creating CEDC with sunset date of 12/31/10 • October 5, 2010 Council passed Ordinance 3808 extending sunset date until 12/31/11 • December 20, 2011 Council passed Ordinance 3868, extending sunset date until 4/29/12 • March 20, 2012 Council passed Ordinance 3876, extending sunset date until 12/31/15 • No other board or commission has a sunset date • The CEDC’s powers and duties are laid out in ECC Section 10.75.030: A. The commission is empowered to advise and make recommendations to the mayor and city council, and as appropriate to the planning commission, architectural design board or other boards or commissions of the city on such matters as may be specifically referred to the commission by the mayor or city council, including but not limited to: 1. Determining new strategies for economic development within the city of Edmonds 2. Identifying new sources of revenue as a direct result of economic development projects for the consideration of the city council At the 2015 City Council retreat a study subgroup was formed to study and discuss the CEDC, its purpose, usefulness, meeting format, subgroups and whether to extend the Commission or allow it to sunset. This subgroup, comprised of Councilmembers Bloom, Mesaros and Petso, met informally in October and discussed these issues, offering several observations and/or recommendations to be shared with full Council to inform decision-making on these issues. Issues discussed during the study group’s two meetings included: • Commission’s charter and purpose as well as subgroups • Costs – 15 hours/month staff time; $133/month support • Potential overlap with other commissions • Transparency of subgroup discussions • Number of commissioners (17) • Should Commission be broken up into 2 or 3 separate commissions? • Meeting format; conducive to fruitful discussion? • Should Commission sunset or be extended? Multiple options were offered for consideration 1. Extend the Commission as is: a. Without sunset b. With sunset clause. Number of years till sunset to be determined c. Allow the Commission to set and determine subgroups as needed, within scope of their role per code. 2. Extend the Commission as is: a. With terms of appointees since 2014 extended to run two full years, others to be reappointed or new appointees b. All members being reappointed or newly appointed c. With term limits d. Without term limits 3. Extend the Commission as is: Packet Page 18 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 14 a. With set number and purpose of subgroups. If so two or three subgroups: i. If two subgroups: 1. Tourism 2. Business Growth & Revitalization ii. If three subgroups: 1. Tourism 2. Business Growth & Revitalization 3. Strategic Action Plan (for items assigned to the CEDC or Economic Development Department OR for stewardship of future public engagement processes) b. Allow the Commission to set and determine subgroups as needed, with the scope of their role per code. 4. Extend Commission as 9 members only 5. Sunset the Commission but create two or three new commissions a. If two: i. Tourism ii. Business Growth & Revitalization b. If three: i. Tourism ii. Business Growth & Revitalization iii. Strategic Action Plan 6. Related to commission subgroups, if they exist: a. Require public notice and meeting summaries b. Do not require public notice, yet require meeting summaries. Councilmember Mesaros asked whether the ordinances that formed other boards and commissions identified how they were structured and what subgroups they had or was this the only commission where Council provided direction regarding structure. Mr. Doherty did not recall that level of precision in other boards/commissions. Development Services Director Shane Hope agreed they did not. Councilmember Bloom asked whether any other commission had 17 members. Mr. Doherty answered no, most had seven to nine members. Councilmember Bloom said one of her concerns was the amount of staff time dedicated to the CEDC. When the Council subgroup met to discuss boards and commissions, a comparison identified staff support provided to the CEDC as 42.5 hours/month, yet this presentation states 15 hours. She recalled Ms. Hope indicating to the Council subgroup that the number of hours had been reduced and asked how it had been reduced so dramatically. Mr. Doherty answered staff discovered Ms. Cruz’s time was listed much higher in the original calculation and was corrected to be substantially lower. The hours listed in the presentation are the current status, not historically. For example, staff who may have routinely attended meetings in the past are attending to make presentations on specific items only. Councilmember Bloom said some of the reduction was in response to Council concern with the amount of staff hours dedicated to the CEDC. Councilmember Petso relayed the most recent CEDC meeting included discussion among Commissioners regarding the size of the group and recognition that discussion had been lacking at the full Commission meetings where minutes are taken that can be reviewed by Council. With 17 members, discussion regarding items takes a great deal of time; the size of the Commission limits the ability for in-depth discussion. The last meeting was the first time she had heard Commissioners acknowledge that issue and contemplate how it might be addressed. Councilmember Mesaros acknowledged discussion by 17 members would consume a lot of time. It is complimentary to the City that there are 17 citizens interested in and thinking about how to best develop economic development opportunities. He commented on the importance of considering economic Packet Page 19 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 15 opportunities during good and poor economic times. The CEDC can provide good advice regarding economic opportunities to the Council as well as other boards and commissions. Having 17 members was a plus to him but how they utilize that time is an organizational and development issue and it behooves staff and CEDC leadership to determine how best to handle that. Mr. Doherty said in talking with Chair Mike Schindler, Vice Chair John Rubenkonig and Commissioner Brue Witenberg, concern was expressed that presentations do not leave enough time for discussion. It may be better to schedule discussion on substantive issues at each meeting and possibly send the issue to a subgroup or ad hoc group for further discussion. Also in that discussion it was agreed the CEDC can touch on very important, sometimes controversial issues such as Westgate, and comments that a smaller number of commissioners such as 9 would result in a quorum of only 5 and a recommendation could be forwarded with an affirmative vote of only 3 members versus 17 which requires a higher number for a quorum. Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled the CEDC was put in place during the economic downturn when the City was laying off staff. She questioned whether other cities still have CEDCs; it was her experience with the upturn in economy, many have been dissolved. She viewed the CEDC as a keeper of the Strategic Action Plan, reaching out on items on which there has not been progress, being a conduit for the SAP. The SAP was a citizen-driven plan that determined priorities; the City has not done its best in tracking or implementing, partially due to staffing. Councilmember Johnson said she has been involved since the beginning; Councilmember Buckshnis and she were members of the 50+ member Levy Lid Lift Committee who recommended the creation of the CEDC. The reason for its creation was an alternative to raising taxes and the general sense the City did not have an expense issue but a revenue issue. The CEDC was suggested to be a time limited commission, specifically to identify ideas during the economic downturn. The reason so many members were appointed was to get input from the highest number of citizens possible. The terms of appointment were not to exceed two years and there were a number of extensions because the work the CEDC had begun needed to be completed. The greatest areas of growth in the City from a revenue standpoint have been from automotive sales and construction; areas that have not be the subject of the CEDC, that are beyond the economic control of policy makers, and are related to the overall economy. The fact that the City is doing better is not the result of 1-2 actions but the regional and state economic condition, what happens at Boeing, low unemployment, etc. Councilmember Johnson continued how the CEDC structures itself with regard to subcommittee and the number of members is not the primary issue; the primary issue is whether it should sunset or continue. At the beginning of each Historic Preservation Commission meeting, the mission is read to remind members why the group exists. The CEDC’s enabling legislation identified the powers and duties as: develop new strategies for economic development and new sources of revenue. The things that came out of that were the Westgate and Five Corners proposals and the SAP, very dynamic and important things. The CEDC is also supposed to provide an annual report the first meeting in December which she was unsure had always been provided. The Commission is also supposed to provide reports and recommendations regarding strategies for economic development, commercial viability, tourist development and activity and joint recommendations with the Planning Board. It appears the CEDC moved away from that very specific action-orientation to more of a discussion/think-tank/ambassadorial function. For her that weighs heavily on the decision whether to sunset the group. Approximately three dozen citizens have served on the commission and she appreciated their work, particularly the long term members who have sustained the group but over time, there have been fewer and fewer recommendations from the CEDC. Councilmember Bloom agreed the biggest issue was first deciding whether or not to sunset the CEDC. If the Council decides to continue the CEDC, this is the time for Council to take an active role in guiding what the CEDC’s provides the Council input on. The subcommittees are important and should be noticed. This commission has changed over time and is having serious growing pains. The Council is responsible Packet Page 20 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 16 for the fact the CEDC is not providing recommendations because the Council has not provided a high level of guidance to the CEDC. She disagreed with Councilmember Mesaros that the Council should take a hands-off approach and allow the CEDC to structure themselves. The purpose of the CEDC is to make recommendations to the Council and it behooves the Council to structure the commission so that they feel supported in whatever they are making recommendations on. She was concerned some of the CEDC’s work had been duplicative of the Planning Board which was the reason the subcommittees recommended by the Council subgroup did not include land use. It is the Council’s role to refer specific issues to the Planning Board or CEDC, not for the CEDC to decide they will provide input on certain land use issues. Councilmember Petso agreed with Councilmembers Bloom and Johnson and said perhaps the CEDC did the job they were tasked with, developing new strategies and new revenue sources. They did that; gambling – no, Westgate – yes. It may be that their job is done. Councilmember Mesaros commented economic development is never done; opportunities abound that need to be taken advantage of. When times are improving, that is another opportunity to consider how to continue that improvement. He was intrigued by Councilmember Johnson’s comment regarding whether the CEDC should continue; from her perspective they may have their lost way in fulfilling the original charger. The right course of action is not to disband the CEDC but to remind them of their original charger and allow them to refocus. That is the support they want from the City Council. He did not support the Council being top down directive of boards and commissions, but rather to provide support by listening rather than telling them what to observe, see and do. He summarized this is an opportunity to refocus the CEDC and allow them to continue to do good work and take the City to another place during better economic times. With regard to whether the CEDC should sunset or not, Councilmember Nelson said there is still a need for the CEDC. A lot of the economic rebound is regional; new strategies are needed for local revenue when the next downturn occurs. Councilmember Bloom said she had hoped to have input from CEDC members themselves. From what Councilmember Petso said, they had a discussion and disagreement about the size of the Commission. She asked whether specific input could be obtained from Commissioners. Mr. Doherty said the Council is scheduled to continue discussion next week; Commissioners could be invited to attend next week’s meeting and provide comment during Audience Comments. The CEDC Chair Mike Schindler provided an annual report recently and voiced support for continuing the CEDC. Councilmember Bloom said in talking with couple Commissioners, she did not get the impression that the feeling about continuing the CEDC is unanimous. Mr. Doherty said having individual Commissioners speak would be their individual opinions, not the official position of the CEDC. Councilmember Bloom said she did not want a majority opinion; she was interested in individual opinions from all members regarding how the group was worked for them, noting some are more/less comfortable joining in a group that size. Mr. Doherty suggested inviting Commissioners to contact the Council. Mayor Earling pointed out the agendas for the next few meetings are very full; if 15 of the 17 members speak for 3 minutes, the meeting would be extend 45 minutes. He was concerned how that could happen in the short time remaining and the end-of-the-year work that needs to be done such as the CFP/CIP, budget, etc. Council President Fraley-Monillas reminded Councilmembers they each have two appointees. She is aware of what one her appointees wants; it was up to her to contact the other one regarding their interest. Councilmembers could contact their appointees this week to determine their thinking. When the CEDC was established, the intent was for Council appointees to report to Councilmembers. Packet Page 21 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 17 Councilmember Bloom said that was a great idea and was what she has been doing. She heard from her appointee that members were discouraged from talking to Council as individuals. Mr. Doherty said he had never heard anyone discouraged from talking to the Council. There is a difference between the CEDC taking a position as a whole; members are discouraged from characterizing their opinion as the CEDC’s position but not from sharing their personal views. Councilmember Petso said at the CEDC meeting, she encouraged commissioners to contact Councilmembers with their opinions on this topic and agreed Councilmembers should reach out to their appointee. She recalled discussion at the last CEDC meeting that individual members who speak to the Council are obligated to state that it is their personal opinion. The CEDC subgroups each developed a list of goals/priorities for the next year which was included in the Council packet (page 387). The subgroups brought their lists to an ad hoc group to develop a list of goals and strategies for the coming year for approval by the CEDC; that document was not approved at the CEDC’s last meeting. She suggested the Council consider the subgroup’s goals and determine how they fit with mission of the CEDC as described by Councilmember Johnson and determine whether to continue the CEDC and if they continue whether the concerns can be addressed. She recalled one of issues on a subgroup’s list was Esperance annexation; the CEDC would not her first resource for that issue. The Commission plans to discuss next year’s goals at their December meeting. Councilmember Mesaros reported his two appointees have been in touch with him in the past 30 days and indicated they wanted the CEDC to be extended as it current exists. Two other CEDC members who contacted him said the same thing. It was the consensus of the Council to continue discussion at the next meeting. G. WDFW GRANT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT AUTHORIZATION Mr. Williams reported Consent Agenda Item G had been to authorize staff to go to bid. This item is a modification to the existing grant agreement with WDFW, the owner of the fishing pier, who have partnered with the City to address 20+ years of deferred maintenance on the pier. Much of it is structurally related and if left unattended for many more years, could require removal of the pier. The funding package for construction was not available at the time the grant agreement was signed; the original scope of work was the design phase which has been completed and was 100% funded by the state. This item commits the resources that have now been acquired, a $800,000 direct appropriation to the WDFW capital budget, a $500,000 grant from the Aquatic Lands Enhance Account, and the City committed $100,000 which provides a budget of approximately $1.4 million. The current cost estimate is $1.4 million; some of the scope will be moved into add alternates in the bid in case the bids are higher than expected. He requested Council approval of the amendment to the existing grant agreement to recognize new revenues and commit them to the project. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. H. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE VISTA PLACE OUTFALL REPAIR PROJECT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT City Engineer Rob English reported this is close out of the Vista Place Outfall, a small works project that was constructed this fall. The project constructed a new outfall structure on an existing storm drain pipe where the existing outfall was eroding. The contractor, G & G Backhoe, provided a low bid of $27,704; the final cost paid to the contractor was $25,770. The project is now complete; funding was provided by the Stormwater Fund. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. Packet Page 22 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 18 I. PRESENTATION OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOHOMISH CONSERVATION DISTRICT City Engineer Rob English reported this is renewal of an agreement with the Snohomish Conservation District approved in 2010 for a 5 year term. The District provides services to cities and agencies within Snohomish County, assessing a fee to residents. Services the District has provided during the past five years include stormwater outreach and education, assisting residents with the design and implementation of raingardens, conducting raingarden workshops and involvement with the City’s first neighborhood raingarden project that was completed this year. The existing ILA expires at the end of the year; the proposed ILA would continue the relationship with the District through the end of 2020. The 2016 scope of work, attached to the agreement, includes continued outreach and education with youth in the School District as well as implementing a second neighborhood raingarden program on 3rd Avenue, and continued assistance to Edmonds residents related to stormwater education and raingardens. A scope of work for 2017 will be developed at the end of 2016. Councilmember Johnson said this is a very worthy relationship and it is great so many raingardens are being implemented communitywide. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO REGARDING POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) At 8:38 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 5 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Petso, Bloom, Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and City Clerk Scott Passey. The executive session concluded at 8:43 p.m. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 8:44 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING (cont’d) A. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2016 BUDGET REVENUE SOURCES, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL NEED RESOLUTION AND THE 2016 PROPERTY TAX LEVY ORDINANCE Mr. James recalled in the prior discussion there was a 4-2 vote to approve the 1%. The Council now needs to decide whether to bank the capacity and pass the Substantial Need Resolution. City Attorney Jeff Taraday drafted an amendment to the Substantial Need Resolution; Mr. James asked whether the Council wanted to review the amendment or reopen discussions on the 4-2 vote. Councilmember Petso said she was not interested in a reconsideration of the prior vote. Mr. James and Mr. Taraday reviewed amendments to the Substantial Need Resolution: • Last Whereas: “WHEREAS, the above recital clauses constitute the findings of the city council that there is substantial need to levy protect the city’s future property taxes levy capacity using Packet Page 23 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 19 based on a limit factor of one hundred one percent and the city council desires to do the same; and now therefore,” • “Section 1: Pursuant to the foregoing finding of substantial need and pursuant to RCW 84.55.0101, the city council desires to protect the city’s future property tax levy capacity by reserving or banking a potential increase to the City of Edmonds 2016 regular property tax levy by a limit factor of one hundred one percent or $99,710 even though the actual amount of property taxes to be levied in 2016 is only intended to be increased by 0.251% (or $25,027)” Mr. Taraday reviewed amendments to the Property Tax Levy Ordinance: • Title amended to read: “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT 0.251%, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $10,144,598 $10,070,015 AN EMS LEVY OF $3,692,091 AND LEVYING $949,540 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME W HEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.” • New 4th Whereas: “WHEREAS, the city recognizes that there is a substantial need to protect its future levy capacity by reserving and banking the unused property tax levy capacity that was created by adoption of the substantial need resolution (Resolution 1343), and” • 5th Whereas amended to read: “…increase the regular property levy by 1 the amount of inflation (0.251%) and keep the…” • Section 2: replace $99,710 with $25,027, 1% with 0.251% and $10,144,698 with $10,070,015 • New Section 6: “To protect the City’s future levy capacity, the City’s unused general property tax levy capacity for the year 2016 of 101% (the amount that could have been adopted pursuant to the adopted substantial need resolution – Resolution 1343) minus 0.251% (the amount of inflation as measured by the IPD and the increase actually levied above) is reserved and banked for future levy as provided by RCW 84.55.092.” • Remaining section numbers updated • Title at the end of the ordinance amended to match the title on the first page. Councilmember Petso thanked Mr. Taraday and Mr. James for their work. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1343. Councilmember Petso spoke in favor of the resolution. With the failure of the earlier motion, no tax increase is planned for 2016 and if this resolution passes, the Council would impose a small tax increase for 2016 and bank the remainder which would be good for citizens and the City. Councilmember Mesaros asked for clarification of Councilmember Petso’s statement; even though no tax increase was planned now, the Council still had an opportunity to do a smaller than 1% tax increase as the budget was approved. Mr. James answered the Council has the option of approving an increase commensurate with the IPD rate alone and not bank the additional capacity which would create a $25,000 tax increase. Mr. Taraday clarified must be done prior to November 30. Mayor Earling commented most ordinances do not need to meet a deadline. He asked what happened if he vetoed the ordinance and the City did not meet the November 30 deadline. Mr. James said the tax amount for 2015 would then be in place for 2016 and there would be no increase. That would also apply to the EMS levy. Packet Page 24 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 20 Councilmember Bloom asked whether the Council could vote tonight to approve the 0.251% increase. Mr. James responded there are limited options: no increase, IPD rate increase, 1%, or do nothing. Mr. Taraday clarified if the Council wanted to adopt the 0.251% increase without banking, another version of the ordinance and resolution would need to be created. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked Mr. James to repeat his response to Mayor Earling’s question of what happens if he voted the ordinance. Mr. James explained vetoing the ordinance would result in no tax increase whatsoever and the 2015 tax amounts would continue in 2016. Councilmember Johnson suggested dividing the question, one vote on the substantial need resolution and another on the tax increase. Mr. James said the motion is only to pass the resolution. At Council’s request, Mr. Taraday read the language in Section 1 again: “ Pursuant to the foregoing finding of substantial need and pursuant to RCW 84.55.0101, the city council desires to protect the city’s future property tax levy capacity by reserving or banking a potential increase to the City of Edmonds 2016 regular property tax levy by a limit factor of one hundred one percent or $99,710 even though the actual amount of property taxes to be levied in 2016 is only intended to be increased by 0.251% (or $25,027).” Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding that the resolution would increase taxes only by 0.251%. Mr. Taraday responded this version of the resolution was drafted to correspond with the version of the ordinance. If the Council does not intend to adopt the ordinance, they probably do not want to vote for this resolution. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO WITHDREW HER MOTION. Before agreeing to the withdrawal of the motion, Councilmember Johnson asked why Councilmember Petso withdrew the motion. Councilmember Petso said the questions and discussion generated by Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a concern in her mind that perhaps this is not the way to proceed. COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, THE SECONDER, AGREED TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE MOTION. Councilmember Petso suggested Mr. Taraday and Mr. James develop an ordinance that would implement the 0.251% property tax increase, the amount the City is permitted to levy without a Substantial Need Resolution. This was the consensus of the Council. J. DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED 2016-2021 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this is an opportunity for the Council to discuss the proposed 2016 CFP/CIP. Staff has made two presentations in the past six weeks and are present to answer any questions. Mayor Earling asked Parks & Recreation Carrie Hite if she wished to make an announcement. Ms. Hite reported she attended the Edmonds School Board meeting where the Board unanimously passed authorization for the superintendent to sign the purchase and sale agreement for Civic Field for $1.9 million. She will pick up the agreement tomorrow morning. The District surplused the property, held a public hearing and unanimously approved the purchase and sale agreement. Packet Page 25 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 21 City Engineer Rob English reported two presentations have been made to City Council and a public hearing held at the Planning Board. Tonight is an opportunity for Council questions and discussion. The CIP can be approved at any time; the CFP needs to be approved with adoption of the 2016 budget. Councilmember Petso inquired about the survey results regarding the presence of bicycles on the Sunset Avenue Walkway. Mr. Williams answered survey responses are still being received and staff plans to allow it to remain active a bit longer to increase the number of responses. The responses have been a somewhat bipolar reaction, a lot of people really like the current set up and a lot do not like it at all. There were not as many in middle that somewhat agree/disagree or do not have an opinion; most respondents have a strong opinion. The results have not changed much during the last two weeks and survey responses are beginning to fall off. Once the survey is completed, the data will be presented to the Council. With regard to bicycles specifically; close to a majority of the responses said there were not enough bicycles to be a problem and another large number of responses, a lower amount, believed bicycles should be removed from the pathway. Councilmember Petso asked whether staff could send Council, prior to the decision on the CIP/CFP, the breakout of responses to the bicycle question. Mr. Williams asked if that was the wish of the entire Council and suggested the responses be looked at in context; staff’s plan was to present the Council a complete package. Councilmember Petso said the reason she asked for that information was when this was brought to Council in September, she made a motion to change the Sunset Avenue Walkway project from a multiuse path back to a walkway project. The response to the question regarding bicycles may help her decide whether to bring that motion again and might inform how other Councilmembers regarding their vote on that motion. If the results haven’t changed much over the past few weeks, she would take whatever number of responses currently exists. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether bicycles could be removed from the walkway for now and potentially added later. She asked whether it was set in stone like the 10 Commandments. Mr. Williams answered it does not rise to the level of the 10 commandments but was a major issue on its face as well as related to the grant agreement the City signed. He preferred to complete the survey and present an official version to the Council and granting agency. Council President Fraley-Monillas reiterated her suggestion to remove bicycles from the path and potentially, based on the survey, allow them later. She asked whether Mr. Williams still believed that would affect the grant. Mr. Williams answered he believed it could have an effect on the grant and he wanted to provide the best case possible, whatever decision the Council makes regarding bicycles, when talking to the granting agency. If the Council makes a quick decision now, it may be seen as the City opting to get rid of bikes on the pathway when the public feels they may be perfectly acceptable which will not be seen positively by the granting agency. He acknowledged it was ultimately the Council’s decision. Councilmember Bloom asked how many responses have been received. Mr. Williams answered in the 700s; approximately 15% of the responses are duplicates but those do not have a remarkable impact on the conclusions. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the survey was only on the website. Mr. Williams answered a link to the survey on the website was sent to numerous Edmonds citizen email lists. The rush of responses early on was a result of the press release and putting it on the City’s website and people looking for the opportunity to respond to the survey. Responses are down but are still being received. Councilmember Bloom asked how duplicates were determined. Mr. Williams answered via the IP addresses, noting duplicates could be legitimate if more than one member of a household used the same computer. With regard to Mr. Williams’ indication the survey would be extended, Councilmember Bloom said the survey states the November 20 deadline so some people may not be completing the survey. Mr. Williams agreed that should be changed. Councilmember Bloom asked how long the survey would be extended. Packet Page 26 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 22 Mr. Williams answered he did not have a firm date in mind; staff was watching the flow of responses and once it appears there are no more responses, it would be wrapped up. Councilmember Bloom asked if that would done before the end of the year and before the Council makes a decision on the CIP/CFP. Mr. Williams answered he did not know due to the holidays. He offered to provide an update next week. Councilmember Petso inquired about the changes to the 126 Fund between the document the Council adopted in September and the proposed document. She recalled approximately $1 million in expenditures was shifted from the General Fund to the 126 Fund, thereby basically depleting the balance in the 126 Fund. For example, $300,000 for the directional horns was moved from the General Fund to the 126 Fund, depleting the ending fund balance in the 126 Fund. She recalled the 126 Fund can be used for park or open space acquisition; if so, what is the rationale for that shift. Mr. Williams answered it was a team decision on behalf of the administration and looking at the administration’s collective recommendation. There was a large and growing balance in the REET 1 126 Fund and it seemed sensible some could be used for one time projects the Council wanted funded in 2016 such as the wayside horns at Main and Dayton. The funds were there and unspoken for and from a Parks perspective, Ms. Hite would likely confirm her capital needs are being met without access to those funds. Councilmember Petso asked what happened if something came up such as half price on the Ebbtide tide flats or something everyone would agree was a meritorious Park acquisition expenditure. With no balance in the 126 Fund she asked whether the purchase be made using reserves or bonding. Mr. Williams answered both would be possible, the City has bonding capacity if an unexpected opportunity like that occurred. He noted if bonds were issued, they could be paid with future REET revenues. With regard to the 125 Fund, Councilmember Petso observed the budget book indicates the Council adopted a policy in 2006 dedicating amounts over $750,000 to transportation projects. She was not certain this CFP/CIP reflected that. She asked whether that policy was adopted via a resolution or ordinance. Mr. Williams did not know. Ms. Hite relayed her understanding it was not a resolution or ordinance; it was a financial policy stated in the budget book, that Parks receives the first $750,000; she fully programs that $750,000 but there is often carryover from previous years. For example, in the 125 Fund this year there is over $1 million programmed; $750,000 for this year plus some carryover from last year. If Council adopted a financial policy that states funds in excess of $750,000 are to be used for transportation, Councilmember Petso asked whether Council was allowed not to follow that policy. Ms. Hite reiterated Council did not pass a financial policy with that wording. A policy has been discussed and there is language in the budget book about the Parks CIP going up to $750,000 but it was her understanding there was no policy. Finance Director Scott James said his predecessor Roger Neumaier did an extensive amount of research and was only able to find a practice, not an adopted policy, resolution or ordinance. That practice was instituted several years ago and situations have substantially changed since then. Councilmember Petso said she will research the matter further and will inform Council if she finds a policy was adopted. Councilmember Johnson said she has long felt the funds set aside for open space and park acquisition were lacking. She did not recall the Council considering the purchase of any parcel that was less than $1 million to $2 million so was concerned the fund balance was such a low amount and recommended the Council take another look at it. Councilmember Bloom referred to Councilmember Johnson’s comment, asking whether she was suggesting the Council look at that before finalizing the CFP/CIP. Councilmember Johnson answered yes. Councilmember Bloom asked how she recommended that be done, whether it was considering how funds would be allocated in the future or determining whether there was a policy related to expenditures over $750,000. Councilmember Johnson suggested staff take another look at it and inform the Council how the Packet Page 27 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 23 ability to purchase land in the future can be preserved. She recalled potential land purchases arise very quickly and several opportunities have passed the City by because adequate funding was not available. She was concerned because this was part of the PROS Plan and this issue was very important to her. As the City gets more developed, precious resource lands such as critical areas are often the last to be built on. She wanted to have the opportunity to purchase those lands in the future if an opportunity arose in order to preserve the environment and help create more open space. Ms. Hite responded in developing the CIP budget this year, she had a similar conversation with Councilmember Nelson. The City Hall bonds have been paid off and there is $200,000 in the open space acquisition line item with the thought that if land became available this year, those funds could be used to bond up to $2 million. Last year’s budget included $100,000 to bond for the acquisition for Civic Field. The City was fortunate to obtain two grants and retain the $400,000 that had been set aside and no bonding capacity was required for the purchase of Civic Field. Into the future, the $200,000 is a placeholder to bond for open space acquisition. If Council wanted staff to consider how more could be budgeted, that could be done but she was satisfied with the budget this year. If the City did not have bonding capacity, she would also be concerned. Mayor Earling relayed staff had these discussions several times during development of the budget and it was an honest effort by staff to address a great deal of one-time expenses. He relayed Mr. Williams, Ms. Hite and he are comfortable with it. He did not want to lose the opportunity to get to several one-time expenses that need to be taken care of, deferred work that needs to be done. 5. PUBLIC HEARING (cont’d) A. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2016 BUDGET REVENUE SOURCES, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL NEED RESOLUTION AND THE 2016 PROPERTY TAX LEVY ORDINANCE City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the language related to banking the capacity was removed from the ordinance; all the percentages (0.251%), the levy amounts and the amount of the increase ($25,027) are the same as the last version of the ordinance. Section 2 is the operative section that actually levies the taxes. Councilmember Petso clarified the reference to substantial need was removed. Mr. Taraday said a whereas clause related to substantial need was removed and former Section 6 related to banking based on the substantial need was also removed. Councilmember Nelson clarified this option did not include banking of any capacity. Mr. Taraday assured there was no banking in this option, just a straight increase of 0.251% or $25,027. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4011 AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. James requested the Council continue the public hearing to next Tuesday. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED TO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO NEXT WEEK. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Petso questioned the need to continue the hearing since the Council already acted on the Property Tax Levy Ordinance that was listed on the agenda for a public hearing. Mr. James advised two public hearings are supposed to be held on the budget. The public hearing was missed last week due to cancelling the meeting so he requested it be continued to next week. Councilmember Petso suggested Packet Page 28 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 24 scheduling a public hearing on the budget next week. Mr. James agreed the Council could open a public hearing, accept public comment and close it. Councilmember Bloom expressed concern that the public hearing on the budget was not listed on the agenda. She asked if Mr. James’ request was to continue the public hearing to next week rather than schedule a public hearing on next week’s agenda. Mr. James said the agenda states public hearing. Councilmember Bloom pointed out the agenda states the public hearing was on the Property Tax Ordinance, not the budget. Two public hearings were scheduled last week, one on property taxes and one on the budget itself; on tonight’s agenda they were combined but it was not clear that the public hearing was also on the budget. She did not see the purpose of continuing a public hearing that was not announced on the agenda and suggested holding a new public hearing next week. City Clerk Scott Passey agreed the public hearing could be closed and a new public hearing on the budget noticed for next week. Mr. Taraday said there was a noticed public hearing for tonight on the 2016 budget although it may not have been identified as a separate item on the agenda. It did not matter whether the public hearing was closed or continued; the question was whether the Council wanted another notice of the public hearing on the 2016 budget. Councilmember Bloom said yes, noting even Mr. Wambolt was unclear whether a public hearing regarding the budget was on the agenda. She preferred to close this public hearing and have a separate public hearing on the 2016 budget next week. Mr. James said the original announcement of the budget schedule stated there would be public hearings on November 17 and 24. Last week’s meeting was cancelled and one public hearing was held tonight and the intent was to hold another public hearing next week. Councilmember Bloom summarized it would be cleaner to close the public hearing and re-notice next week’s public hearing. Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. A public hearing regarding the 2016 budget will be scheduled on next week’s agenda. 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling wished the council, staff and community a Happy Thanksgiving. Mayor Earling reported when Councilmember opened their mailbox last week, they found someone had put crumb rubber in the mailbox. Most citizen comments have been well intended and respectful about pros and cons of crumb rubber, but he found it despicable that someone would stoop to the level of going to a Councilmember’s home and invading their privacy with such an ignorant effort. He was dismayed by this action and hoped there was a way to encounter the person who did it. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Bloom wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and encouraged anyone who hasn’t competed the Sunset Avenue Walkway survey on the City’s website to so as soon as possible in order to get everyone’s opinion. Councilmember Nelson wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He thanked the 116 people who attended last Wednesday’s Edmonds Waterfront Access Study public meeting. He looked forward to sharing their great input, feedback and discussion in the future. Councilmember Petso said she was blissfully unaware of the crumb rubber incident. With regard to what has changed regarding crumb rubber, she recalled when the issue first came to the Council, government agencies said crumb rubber was safe to play on and many people thought they had done their due diligence because of that. Government agencies are no longer saying it is safe to play on. As the Council Packet Page 29 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 24, 2015 Page 25 pondered that, talked to people and did research, she urged them to consider that the information has changed over the past six months. Councilmember Petso expressed her appreciation for what the School District did in having a public hearing prior to finalizing the transaction with the City regarding Civic Field even though it delayed the transaction for a week. She plans to research what City Council could do to ensure future property sales by the City also follow a more structured process. She read in the newspaper frustration by a group of citizens to find that a purchase and sale had been arranged between two government agencies on a property they were very concerned with and the entire deal was essentially done in executive session and one governing body finalized the deal in public after meeting in executive session. She acknowledged that could be frustrating for citizens. Councilmember Johnson wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and invited them to the annual tree lighting ceremony sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, beginning at 4:30 p.m. with lighting at 5:30. She invited members of the Citizens Economic Development Commission to contact her to express their opinion. Councilmember Mesaros echoed Councilmember Johnson comments. He encouraged the public to attend the tree lighting ceremony, noting it is a fun event; the weather Saturday evening will be crisp and cold. Council President Fraley-Monillas looked forward to the tree lighting ceremony, noting it was her 10th year attending that event and it means a lot to her family. She expressed kudos for the Saturday Holiday Market, noting she left with two bags of food. The Saturday Market continues through December 19 and features cheeses, meat, flowers, pastas, etc. Council President Fraley-Monillas urged Councilmembers to submit questions regarding the budget to staff in advance. The Council has not yet had any discussion regarding the budget and because there is a short time left to finish budget, it is crucial to streamline the process. She invited Councilmembers to call her with any questions about the Council’s budget. Councilmember Petso asked whether Councilmembers should begin making proposed amendments to the budget. Mayor Earling said he would like to get budget completed during the next couple meetings. Numerous questions have been submitted and answered by staff. The sooner amendments can surface the better for the Council to make decisions. Councilmember Johnson suggested proposed amendments be sent to Mr. James and copied to Councilmembers. Mayor Earling agreed. 9. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 10. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:41 p.m. Packet Page 30 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES December 1, 2015 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Ari Girouard, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief A. Greenmun, Police Corporal Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed due to the extensive agenda, staff had agreed to move Item 6B, 2015 Nonrepresented Compensation Study, to the December 15 meeting. Councilmember Bloom referred to Agenda Item 5A, Public Hearing on 2016 Budget and Adoption of 2016 Budget and Adoption of Amendments to the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and asked if the public hearing was only on the budget. Mayor Earling relayed his understanding the public hearing was also regarding the Capital Facilities Element (CFP) of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Taraday said it made sense for the CFP/CIP to be part of the same public hearing as both the budget and CFP would be adopted in the same ordinance. Councilmember Bloom pointed out the CFP/CIP was also an agenda item under action items. Mr. Taraday answered the hearing would take place under Item 5A. Item 6A would be merged with Item 5A, Adoption of the budget and CFP. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the Council was required to have two public hearings on the budget. Mr. Taraday said he did not think so but the Council has. Councilmember Bloom did not think a public hearing was held last week; it may have been announced as a public hearing but there was some confusion because it was not on the agenda as a public hearing. City Clerk Scott Passey explained the notice stated public hearing on 2016 budget revenues sources including the property tax levy rate. Tonight is a second public hearing on the general budget as well as the CFP/CIP. Councilmember Bloom reiterated last week’s public hearing was announced as a public hearing on the 1% tax increase, the Packet Page 31 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 2 agenda did not include state a public hearing regarding the budget. Finance Director Scott James responded it was posted as a public hearing on the budget, revenue sources and property taxes. The original budget schedule listed two public hearing dates for the budget: November 17 which the Council subsequently cancelled so the first public hearing was held November 24 and this is the second public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #217341 THROUGH #217394 DATED NOVEMBER 25, 2015 FOR $156,028.33 B. APPROVAL OF PAYMENTS FOR KELLY BUY BACK (CHECK #61879 THROUGH #61912) FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,764.97 AND HOLIDAY BUY BACK (CHECKS #61913 THOUGH #61964) FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE EMPLOYEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $129,882.54 PER UNION CONTRACTS C. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE VISTA PLACE OUTFALL REPAIR PROJECT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT D. APPROVE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOHOMISH CONSERVATION DISTRICT E. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ZACHOR & THOMAS, INC., P.S. FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SERVICES F. APPROVAL OF DRAFT 2016 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA G. EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT - EMERGENCY ACCESS KEY ILA H. YAKIMA COUNTY INMATE HOUSING AGREEMENT – ADDENDUM I. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC SECTIONS 5.32.107 AND 5.32.108 - SHELLFISH REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT J. WDFW GRANT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT AUTHORIZATION 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jenny Anttila, Edmonds, a member of the Citizens Edmonds Development Commission (CEDC) speaking as private citizen, said it is a worthy commission, but there are way too many people on it. She did not think the commission should have speakers but should have more topic discussions among members. She did not think the Planning Board or Port should be involved in meetings other than possibly providing a written report. She concluded the CEDC is a worthy commission and an important part of the City. Packet Page 32 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 3 Darrol Haug, Edmonds, described his volunteer involvement on the CTAC committee, outreach committee, levy committee and a member of the CEDC, first appointed by the late Councilmember Peggy Olsen and reappointed by Councilmember Buckshnis. He has served on several CEDC subcommittees including technology, land use and the Strategic Action Plan (SAP). Speaking as an private citizen who serves on the CEDC, he recommended extending the CEDC in its current form with the current criteria (generate revenues for the City), extending the term of current commissioners until the Council redirect the CEDC’s efforts and allowing each member to reapply under that new direction, adding elements of the SAP into the CEDC scope of work, and requesting quarterly reports from the CEDC with a response by the Council regarding the previous months’ work. The SAP originated form the CEDC; 2500 people were involved including Councilmembers and the Planning Board, and it produced 80 elements 13 of which the CEDC is a participant. The CEDC should be allowed to provide input to Council on those elements. Council has approved and reapproved the SAP. He summarized the CEDC can do more for the City, their interaction with Council could be better, and with better direction and output, the CEDC can serve the City better. Stephen Clifton, Edmonds, referred to Item 6C, Council Deliberation on the Future of the CEDC. In response to whether the CEDC should be extended as is, he recommend the current Council take action to extend the sunset date or remove the sunset date. He recommended the current Council not take action on other questions in the memo but allow the Council that will exist on January 1, 2016 to take action as it will be the body that has have direct oversight and be involved with the CEDC for at least the next 2 years. His recommendation to remove the sunset date was based on his belief and professional opinion that economic development should be an ongoing program/effort and was surprised to hear comments last week that perhaps the CEDC had fulfilled its mission. Some think of economic development as job creation, revenue generation or increase in construction activity but those terms are more about economic growth than economic development. Economic development involves creating programs, policies or implementing actions intended to improve the economic well-being and quality of life of the community. It is important to create a solid foundation for economic growth as success often does not occur overnight. No single entity or individual has the ability to undertake all actions necessary to create and/or maintain economic sustainability. This is done most effectively when individuals and organizations work collaborative; it takes a community to build a village. The Economic Development & Community Services Department consists of two people who have limited hours and resources; the CEDC serves as a valuable resource whose talented members volunteer their time to contribute and provide feedback on ideas and proposed economic development related programs. With regard to whether to sunset the CEDC and create 2-3 commissions, he said it did not make sense to create new commissions when one commission with subgroups can be just as or more effective. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, referred to property tax rates and the comment at last week’s Council meeting that Edmonds’ property tax rate is the fifth lowest in Snohomish County, pointing out the property tax rate is an indicator of nothing and Edmonds’ is actually the seventh lowest in Snohomish County. The big factor in determining property tax is the value of property. For example, Woodway has the second lowest property tax rate in Snohomish County but residents pay the highest property taxes because of their property values. Total taxes paid in Edmonds are actually higher than the seventh lowest rate; he did not believe taxes were too high as there were some things that could be done with more taxes. He did not want the public misled that their property taxes were low because the tax rate was relatively low; that doesn’t mean a thing. Doug Swartz, Edmonds, a member of the CEDC speaking as private citizen, said after serving on the commission for the past 20 months, he recommended it either be sunsetted or reconstituted as a smaller, more focused group because it does not accomplish anything in its current configuration. At one meeting, the CEDC had a difficult time developing a list of accomplishments. He did not find fault with the commissioners or the leadership of the commission but a lack of focus because there were no clear Packet Page 33 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 4 objectives. The major focus of the CEDC is supposed to be business development but the City already has a full-time business development person, Patrick Doherty. He spent a lot of time on the CEDC, going into it with a very positive attitude, but was now somewhat jaded and felt he wasted a lot of time with nothing to show for it. If the CEDC were continued, he recommended establishing objectives. Next, he strongly recommended the Council consider eliminating the police presence at Council meetings. Although there was one incident, he did not feel having a police officer present at Council meetings set the right tone. Alex Markiel, Brier, quoted former President Ronald Regan, “Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.” She said extending a ban on crumb rubber to all public and private is appropriate because the use of crumb rubber involves significant negative externalities. If crumb rubber stayed where it was put, did not have any dust and did not off-gas, it could be argued that public property owners should be allowed to use it because their decision only affects them. However, off-gassed toxic chemicals from crumb rubber and airborne dust particles pollute the air especially neighboring properties. When it rains zinc, and other toxic chemicals end up in groundwater, streams, rivers and the ocean. Air and water pollution are negative externalities in economics; it has long been recognized that government can regulate products that produce significant negative externalities. Government intervention is especially warranted when negative externalities are greater than the individual benefit or when a substitute product produces significant fewer negative externalities while yielding similar benefits. It does not seem like a good idea to allow the use of crumb rubber it unnecessarily pollutes the earth. Government routinely passes laws on things that pollute; this time the federal government has left it up to state and local governments to regulate crumb rubber. Health risks are also a negative externality; field owners do not currently pay for any negative health effects field users experience. Fields on school property affect the health of children. Many off- gassed chemicals are respiratory irritants; a parent recently reported a student at Edmonds Heights who now reads in the library during lunch because crumb rubber on the football fields caused him to have asthma attacks. She quoted former President Thomas Jefferson, “The care of human life and happiness, and not the disruption, is the first and only object of good government. She urged the Council to protect the environment, air and kids like her from toxic turf. Christi Davis, PhD, Brier, thanked the Council for their extreme patience throughout this process, giving the community the opportunity to express its values and desire for safe playfields. It has also provided her daughter excellent civics lessons and to apply what she has learned about micro economics. The science has already been discussed; tonight the Council will discuss whether it is justified in banning crumb rubber in place beyond City property. Several types of market failure justify government intervention in the market, including the presence of externalities as well as information asymmetry. The crumb rubber industry knows the science documenting potential health risks associated with their product but has worked to confuse the public by promoting misleading studies, reporting the results of legitimate studies out of context and spinning findings to make it appear crumb rubber has been proven safe. The tobacco industry first developed the strategy of manufacturing scientific uncertainty and it has been successful used in many contexts ever since. The end result is consumers often cannot tell whether things like BPA, phthalates or crumb rubber are actual threats or just the ravings of paranoid luddites and eco- freaks, the exact situation when government intervention is useful. It is inefficient to expect each decision-maker to do the research necessary to determine the health risks or wade through the scientific studies. She quoted President Obama, “If people cannot trust the government to do the job for which it exists, to protect them and to promote their common welfare, then all else is lost.” The Council has heard from toxicologists and other health experts and are among the most well informed government officials on the topic of luddites. There is limited guidance from the government; the EPA has stated new data analysis is needed about children’s health risks and exposures as the use and variety of crumb rubber fields has changed; the exact health risks are not known. While further studies are being conducted, communities retiring or replacing crumb rubber fields can consider alternate materials. Citizens have clearly expressed their concerns to the Council and made the case for artificial turf with nontoxic infills; Packet Page 34 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 5 no one has presented evidence that crumb rubber is the only appropriate or cost effective infill. The main benefits of crumb rubber are that it is cheap and readily available because it is a waste product filled with carcinogens that has few other uses. The City Council’s job is to protect citizens; she asked the Council to ban crumb rubber throughout the entire City on all property. Laura Johnson, Edmonds, said given the lack of definite facts on crumb rubber and the undisputed fact that tires contain many harmful toxins and cancer-causing chemicals, a moratorium on the use of crumb rubber is the most prudent decision. She applauded the Council for looking closely at the issue and weighing all options and respected the delicate situation this presents with regard to the City’s relationship with the School District. However, the Council is tasked with protecting citizens and environment and she encouraged the Council to extend this protection to the fullest extent that their powers would allow. It is the best choice for the health of residents, particularly children, and for the environment. The use of crumb rubber is not necessary to the education of students; in fact it is taking away educational opportunities for some students, those with asthma and those whose parents are unwilling to allow their children to be the test subjects in a national experiment. Some have said they will not let their children or grandchildren play on crumb rubber; opportunities are being lost for children to participate in beneficial physical education due to the decision to use a hazardous waste product on playfields. The Council tried to intervene on the Woodway Fields and convince the School District to use a safer choice but there were no measures in place to enforce this change and the Council was unable to prevent nearly 80,000 shredded tires from being spread over acres of City-zoned open space. The Council now has an opportunity and responsibility to prevent this from happening in the future. It will mean standing firm to a bully move by the School District and exerting the Council’s power as elected officials. Many including the EPA and CPSC have backed away from endorsing the safety of crumb rubber, citing the lack of long term study and data gaps in current studies. The head of the EPA said the choice to use crumb rubber remains a state and local decision. Many member of the US Congress are calling for more oversight, studies and precaution while answers are found, as is Washington State. Researchers, endocrinologists, developmental biologists, epidemiologists are all extremely concerned about the health effects. She referred to a list of quotes she sent Council from many well-respected health professionals; two weeks ago two toxicologist spoke at a special presentation on crumb rubber, all urging caution, citing the lack of necessary studies and the great potential for harm, particularly to youngest citizens. She urged the Council to show the same concern for human and environment health by placing a citywide moratorium on the use of crumb rubber on children’s playfields and athletic fields until the necessary studies have been completed. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commended the Council for extending the crumb rubber hearings so long that they had given the public ample opportunity to learn and study what’s going on with the product; the Council has actually done a good job educating public although the public has had a negative response to the Council’s lack of action. He referred to the letter from the Edmonds School District which mentions the Verdant Health Report. He recalled Verdant’s toxicologist was given three things to study but told Verdant they only had time to do one so Verdant did not have very good information. When the new Councilmembers take office, he hoped they remembered the Council’s priority was the citizens’ health, safety and welfare. He commented the City Attorney has not provided a response in public to the letter from the School District. He referred to the well-qualified toxicologist David Anderson, urging the Council to take everything he said as the truth. Next, as a member of the CEDC member speaking as a private citizen, he has gotten a lot of sleep at their meetings because they are dull and uninteresting. Scott Blomenkamp, Edmonds, pointed out to those concerned with affecting private property, seven chapters of the ECDC explicitly affect private property including setbacks, lot coverage, critical areas, etc. as well as the building code, Chapter 19. Although he agreed with not affecting private property when possible, he found that concept absurd in this context because the City affected it all the time. Residents are not allowed to park more than 5-6 cars on their property but the City allowed someone to put 10,000 Packet Page 35 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 6 tires on their property. With regard to the budget, he suggested the Council consider that the School District did not pay a traffic mitigation fee of approximately $200,000 for the Woodway Fields project as required by the code. Around Thanksgiving, the fields were padlocked; they previously were open to community use. He noted the School District lost the case they cited in their letter. The Council cannot affect the curriculum but can use its police powers with regard to the building code. Alex Witenberg, Edmonds, expressed concern with last week’s report that a Councilmember found crumb rubber in his/her mailbox. He has never heard of such an incident in the decade he has been watching City Council in person, on TV, or on the internet. After following the issue of crumb rubber for several months, he understood a lot of people in the community are passionate about the issue. He was disheartened by this action, finding it a terrible message to send to the community’s youth, that the Council should legislate through intimidation. He urged the Council to use their rational minds and make an informed decision on the topic. Councilmember Bloom read an email from Cliff Sanderlin and Heather Marks: Crumb rubber. Leukemia. Lawsuits. Both the Edmonds School District and City of Edmonds will likely be sued because our children and grandchildren may get cancer from the crumb rubber installed on the Old Woodway High School Sports Complex and other district playfields. Health research findings are mounting. Young women soccer players, especially goalies who have had more physical contact with artificial turf padded with crumb rubber, are showing up with leukemia. Because of carbon black and many other carcinogens in ground-up tire infill, many more cancers will emerge in both young women and men. What will parents and grandparents do? They will sue not only the school district but also the city. The people of the Edmonds School District have entrusted the district with not only educating our children but also with protecting their health, fitness and well-being. The district’s actions regarding crumb rubber do not protect the health and well-being of our young people. There is no effort to act on the side of caution. It comes down to money and power. The district is larger and richer than the City of Edmonds. Now the district is threatening to sue the city if it interferes with its use of crumb rubber. This long relationship is complex and intertwined but why does the City of Edmonds have to do business with playground bullies? Both the School District and City have been warned about the dangers of using crumb rubber by their constituents and should be held accountable. The following leaders have been put on notice: Edmonds School District Superintendent Nick Brossoit; School Board Members Kory DeMun, Gary Noble, April Nowak, Ann McMurray, and Diana White. City of Edmonds: Mayor Dave Earling, City Councilmembers Kristina Johnson, Mike Nelson, Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Diane Buckshnis, Joan Bloom, Tom Mesaros and Lora Petso. The author urged these leaders to take seriously the folly of padding artificial turf playfields with well-known cancer-causing materials; elected officials are supposed to work for us, not for the crumb rubber industry. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2016 BUDGET AND ADOPTION OF 2016 BUDGET AND ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. JennyAnttila, Edmonds, referred to the Sunset Avenue survey, stating the first question on the survey should have been do you want the City to pay $2.3 million for the changes. She anticipated the resounding answer from the majority would have been no. She questioned how much of that cost was City capital improvements such as sewer and water and suggested that be in a separate City maintenance budget and not included in the $2.3 million Sunset Avenue project. With regard to the angle parking, she said Sunset Avenue has turned into a tangle of metal cars and questioned why so many cars had to be squeezed in as possible. Sunset Avenue was very nice before with adequate parking, now it is a congested Packet Page 36 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 7 parking lot. She suggested the City reach agreement with the homeowners on the east side to widen the sidewalk; people do not have to walk on the west side above a cliff and the train to see the view. Bicycles should not be included on a wider sidewalk on the east side. Next, with regard to the addition of 13 staff members, she suggested there be one dedicated parking officer to oversee existing parking regulations. The position’s salary could be offset by the revenue from parking tickets. Darrol Haug, Edmonds, speaking as individual, said the City Council and CEDC were the origin of the SAP; 2500 people were involved, 80+ elements were identified within 5 basic strategies, with over $200,000 in direct expenses. The SAP has twice been approved by the Council. Last year the Council provided funds for a system to track progress on elements. That system is fully operational and shows the Council and public progress being made on SAP elements. The 2016 budget does not include funds for tracking the SAP and he hoped the Council would fund additional tracking; otherwise all the effort put into the tracking system would be lost. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, believed the Police Department deserved to have more than the two new staff members in the budget as those new staff do nothing to remedy the City’s traffic situation. The Police Department has 6 fewer staff than they had in the peak year of 2007, compared to a combined Development Services, Engineering and Public Works that had 40.1 staff in 2008; today they have 42.6. He recalled his comments to the Council on April 26, 2011, citing Development Services as an example of boom year staffing; the number of construction projects began to crash three years ago when there were three times as many projects as there are now. Further evidence of the sharp reduction in construction is the frequent cancellation of ADB meetings because there are no projects to review; in fact there has not been a single projects in the five BD zones since they were created yet staffing levels in departments involved with construction activity has not been reduced. One of Murphy’s Laws states that work expands to fill the time available. Not only is the City not benefiting from reduced staff levels, there is a good possibility that staff will need to be increased when construction activity returns to normal levels. Mr. Wambolt commented that is what is happening now; he urged the Council to look at staffing levels and allocate more people to the Police Department. Doug Swartz, Edmonds, relayed his overall feeling that the budget was moving out of control this year; almost all the budget increase is hiring new staff. The budget proposal is to hire 11 new staff or about 5.5%. When the population of the City was not increasing, he questioned the need to continually increase staff. Labor and benefits increased by 4.6% from 2013 to 2014, 7.3% from 2014 to 2015 and 7% from 2015 to 2016. During same period non-labor and benefits, the service portion of the budget, decreased 3.4% from 2014 to 2015 and 0.8% from 2015 to 2016. Head counts are fixed expenses and hard to turn back when the next recession comes; recession are cyclical every seven years. He questioned “strange” budget items such as $19,000 for a survey of residents for a handful of survey questions and no description of the questions or the purpose of the survey. He also questioned an additional $66,000 for the waterfront access study. He thought this was a volunteer group but at the first meeting, there were 7-8 consultants who were part of the group. He questioned $50,000 for a transition to a web-based operations management system, pointing out SaaS (Software as a Service) is intended to spread costs over years, not pay all of it up front. He also questioned $30,000 for conversion of 4 trucks to propane; the justification is to save on fuel and because it would be nice to have more alternative fuel vehicle. He said that is not a justification and there is no return on investment analysis. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, questioned what this public hearing is about, whether it was on the CIP. He found combining the hearings very confusing and feared the general public had not been informed. He referred to Annual Street Preservation Program overlays and chip seals in Fund 112 and estimates of $1.3 million this year and next and doubling in 2017. The amount of chip sealing is unknown; it may only be half of a street. He questioned how the Council could approve something with such a general description. Packet Page 37 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 8 He recalled the Council used to have special budget sessions which has not happened lately. He urged the Council to review the budget more closely. Finance Director Scott James reviewed staff recommended changes to 2016 budget: Item # Descriptions Cash Increase (Decrease) GENERAL FUND 1 Students Saving Salmon Club for Stream Testing ($5,000) 2 Reduce PFD Contingency Reserve to $135,000 from $180,000 $45,000 3 Increase Prosecutor Contract (DP 39) ($12,000) 4 Include “ongoing” transfer to Sister City Fund 138 ($5,000) Impacts to General Fund Ending Cash $23,000 Fund 112 Street Construction 5 Reduce Stormwater Funding ($187,500) Impacts to Fund 112 Ending Cash ($187,500) Fund 421 Water Utility Fund 5 Increase Stormwater Funding $187,500 Impacts to Fund 412 Ending Cash $187,500 Mr. James reviewed Council requested changes to the 2016 budget: Item # Descriptions Cash Increase (Decrease) Submitter GENERAL FUND 1 Council Legislative Asst (DP 1) Move expense from salaries to professional services $0 Buckshnis 2 Increase Council Contingency Funding by $10,000 ($10,000) Buckshnis 3 Reduce Council Travel Budget by $2,500 $2,500 Bloom 4 Reduce Council Training Budget by $2,250 $2,250 Bloom 5 Add Tree Board Funding for staff support & supplies ($9,000) Bloom 6 Remove Council Legislative Asst (DP 1) $42,160 Petso 7 Remove Staff Accountant Position (DP 11) $67,020 Petso 8 Move expense for downtown restroom contribution from REET 1 Fund 126 to General Fund ($90,000) Petso 9 Remove Community Relations Consultant (DP 27) $30,000 Petso 10 Remove Increase to Annual Business Attraction Advertising Expense (DP 30) $26,000 Petso 11 Remove Permit Coordinator Position (DP 35) $25,720 Petso 12 Remove Advance Planner Positions (DP 36) $38,530 Petso 13 Move expense of purchase of John Deere Gator Utility Tractor to Utility Fund (DP 42) $14,400 Petso 14 Remove Construction Inspector Position (DP 44) (Net Cost to General Fund) $11,380 Petso 15 Move Trackside Warning System from Fund 126 REET 1 to General Fund ($300,000) Petso Impacts to General Fund ($149,040) Fund 126 REET 1 8 Move expense for downtown restroom contribution From REET 1 Fund 126 to General Fund $90,000 Petso Packet Page 38 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 9 15 Move Trackside Warning System from Fund 126 REET 1 to General Fund $300,000 Petso 16 Move $100,000 of Annual Street Preservation Expense to REET 2 Fund 125 $100,000 Petso Impacts to Fund 126 Ending Cash $490,000 Fund 125 REET 2 16 Move $100,000 of Annual Street Preservation Expense from REET 1 to Fund 126 ($100,00) Petso Impacts to Fund 125 Ending Cash During the above review, Mr. James said the request to move $100,000 of Annual Street Preservation Expense from the REET 1 Fund 126 to REET 2 Fund 125 from Councilmember Petso included reference to a policy put in place in 2006 with regard to $750,000 being used for transportation. Research conducted by his predecessor, Roger Neumaier, found no policy. Mr. James indicated he forwarded minutes from a 2006 Council meeting to City Attorney Jeff Taraday. Mr. Taraday advised it is not clear from the minutes that a vote was ever taken on the policy. Even if there was, any budget policy adopted by an earlier Council, whether by motion or resolution, is not binding on the current City Council in adopting a budget. Whether to abide by those earlier Council policies is at the Council discretion. Mr. James continued his review of Council requested changes to the 2016 budget: Fund 421 Water Utility Fund 7 Remove Staff Accountant Position (DP 11) $13,300 Petso 11 Remove Permit Coordinator Position (DP 35) $2,720 Petso 14 Remove Construction Inspector Position (DP 44) $34,140 Petso 17 Remove Water Department position $67,080 Bloom Impacts to Fund 421 Ending Cash $13,300 Fund 422 Storm Utility Fund 7 Remove Staff Accountant Position (DP 11) $7,390 Petso 11 Remove Permit Coordinator Position (DP 35) $2,720 Petso 14 Remove Construction Inspector Position (DP 44) $34,140 Petso Impacts to Fund 422 Ending Cash 7,390 Fund 423 Sewer Fund 7 Remove Staff Accountant Position (DP 11) $16,240 Petso 11 Remove Permit Coordinator Position (DP 35) $2,720 Petso 14 Remove Construction Inspector Position (DP 44) $34,140 Petso Impacts to Fund 423 Ending Cash $16,240 Fund 511 Equipment Rental Fund 13 Move expense of purchase of John Deere Gator Utility Tractor to Utility Fund (DP 42) ($14,400) Petso Impacts to Fund 511 Ending Cash ($14,400) Councilmember Petso thanked Mr. James for putting this together on short notice. She inquired about the construction inspector position and Mr. James’ indication that only 10% of the salary would be paid from the General Fund, pointing out the Utility Funds were only making a token payment of $2700 each which leaves a lot of the salary to allegedly be covered by grants. She asked if that was the expectation for 2016 or if the majority of the salary was to be covered by grant money every year. Mr. James referred to DP #44, construction inspector, $80,000 in wages, $20,800 in benefits and miscellaneous expenses of $13,000. Of those costs $102,420 or 90% is to be paid by the Utility Fund. The cost to General Fund is $11,380. Councilmember Petso apologized she was looking at another position. Packet Page 39 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 10 Councilmember Buckshnis did not recall adopting the CFP/CIP and the budget in one ordnance in the past. Last year there were six public comments on the CFP/CIP; there is a lot of information presented at one time and only one person commented on the CFP/CIP. She asked why they had been combined in one ordinance. Mr. Taraday responded the CFP is part of the Comprehensive Plan and it can either be amended along with rest of the Comprehensive Plan amendments on an annual basis or it can be amended in conjunction with adoption/amendment of the budget which is being done this year. The Council cannot adopt CFP amendments on a standalone basis. Councilmember Buckshnis commented CIP amendments also cannot be adopted on a standalone basis because they affect the budget. Mr. Taraday agreed the CIP was related to the budget but unlike the CFP which is governed by state law, there is no state law governing the CIP. Councilmember Buckshnis requested a response to Mr. Swartz’s question about changing cars from gas to propane. Mr. Williams answered that program has been going well for the past three years. The physical equipment to take delivery and dispense propane into City vehicle was initially installed. Over a two year period, all the police patrol vehicles were converted to dual fuel, gas and propane. Patrol vehicles now burn very little gas, almost all their miles are fueled by propane. Propane is cheaper, which saves a significant amount on the City’s fuel bill; the City is still realizing the benefits of the original contract with Blue Start Gas. Propane also reduces greenhouse gas emissions and has fewer toxic emissions. Since then, two Public Works F350 and F450 trucks have been converted and the proposal in the 2016 budget is to convert 4 additional vehicles. The intent is to do a few vehicles a year; they must be done when the Prins bi-fuel system is certified for use on new models as it is not available for all City vehicles. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to discussions with Police Chief Compaan related to speeding, vehicle/pedestrian accidents and his indication that one of the traffic officers had retired. To the question of how much staff is allocated to traffic enforcement, Chief Compaan answered there are four, two officers assigned to motorcycle patrol and two assigned to a traffic car. Their duties include investigation of traffic collisions as well as traffic enforcement and they are also available as needed to respond to patrol calls depending on the call load. Last year the department issued about 3,500 citations and made approximately 5,200 traffic stops. Last year there were 18 car/pedestrian collisions and about same number this year. He acknowledged that was a concern; a lot has to do with driver inattention or committing a traffic violation that contributes to the collision. Citations are typically issued after the fact following investigation. There is an ongoing, Washington statewide traffic safety program with regard to DUI enforcement and vehicle/pedestrian safety; it is difficult to identify a single contributing factor. People often get in a hurry and environmental conditions such as fog, rain, ice, snow are contributing factors. Chief Compaan commented there has been discussion among Councilmembers and with the Police Department about whether to add a traffic enforcement officer. Although he would not turn down an additional staff person, everyone is trying to live within their means in the budget. He did not specifically request an additional officer for traffic enforcement in the 2016 budget. His priority for 2016 was getting the Street Crimes Unit up and running and he appreciated Council support for that effort. If the Council was interested in additional traffic enforcement by adding an FTE, he was willing to have that discussion but it needs to be in the context of the overall budget to properly fund it. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled discussion about getting up to speed with new officers and maybe addressing it in next year’s budget. Chief Compaan said the department has a new motorcycle officer who is very enthusiastic. He anticipated increased enforcement by him and the existing motorcycle officer. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how many commissioned officers the Police Department has. Chief Compaan answered 53 commissioned officers including the 3 administrative staff; the remainder is detectives and line officers. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there are 2 motorcycle officers Packet Page 40 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 11 and 2 patrol cars on each shift or for a 24 hour period. Chief Compaan answered the motorcycle officers work primarily daytime hours and they are scheduled on opposite days. The traffic officers assigned to cars work primarily evenings and are also scheduled on opposite days; their focus is DUI enforcement as well as enforcement of rules of the road violations. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether some of the other 46 FTE could be reallocated to provide more traffic enforcement. Chief Compaan reviewed the current allocation: 32 patrol, 5 traffic (including a sergeant who is on patrol at times), 1 K-9, 8 detectives, 1 training corporal, 1 administrative sergeant, 1 professional standards sergeant and 3 administration. He emphasized that although 53 sounds like large number, there are only 32 in patrol plus 1 K-9. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding of Chief Compaan’s explanation that he did not see how a position could be reallocated to traffic. Chief Compaan agreed he did not enough staff to do that. Council President Fraley-Monillas referred to the 3,500 citations issued last year and asked how many were issued the previous two years. Chief Compaan answered the number of citations has been down slightly due to allocation of traffic enforcement officers within the unit and longer term officer injuries. He expected the number of citations to increase. Council President Fraley-Monillas summarized the department issued more citations three years ago. Chief Compaan answered yes and explained it was not just the traffic officers who issue citations; other officers also issue citations. The overall call load has been up and the time it takes to investigate calls for service and crimes has increased. For example in the past the call load for officers working the dayshift was lower than the early evening and nighttime hours; that is no longer true, dayshift is very busy and it is not unusual for officers to go from call to call. The nature of what the department does has changed which has impacted so-called free time that could be allocated more easily to traffic enforcement. Councilmember Bloom referred to a citizen’s comments regarding parking enforcement and asked how many officers write parking tickets. Chief Compaan answered in addition to the 53 commissioned members, there are 2 animal control/ordinance enforcement/parking officers. Theoretically there is 7 day/week coverage, however, 66-75% of their time is allocated to animal control issues and the balance as available to parking enforcement. With the call load for animal control issues and the time it takes animals to the kennel, write reports, etc., there is not a lot of time left for parking enforcement. Councilmember Bloom asked if Chief Compaan saw a need for more parking enforcement officer. Chief Compaan agreed there was a need for parking enforcement; last year slightly over 1,000 parking citations were most issued by the 2 parking enforcement officers. He agreed they could always do more but there is a balance with parking enforcement; it needs to be reasonable and prudent as well as not being too heavy handed as the City wants people to visit the downtown (most citations are issued downtown). In the past the department had three animal control/ordinance enforcement officers; the third position was shared with Mountlake Terrace. The 2.5 officers was a good mix but the half-time position was lost a number of years ago. Additional parking enforcement could be discussed in the context of the overall budget. Councilmember Bloom asked if it was less expensive to hire a parking enforcement person who would have a lower skill level than a police officer. Chief Compaan answered the animal control/ordinance enforcement/parking officers have done those three tasks and the City has never had one person strictly allocated to parking enforcement. Given the size of the downtown, he not see the need for 8-10 hours/day of parking enforcement. A lot of parking enforcement is done on a spot check basis, voluntary compliance versus heavy handed enforcement. Councilmember Bloom asked whether tickets defray the cost of the officers. Chief Compaan agreed there is revenue derived from citations, revenue from the 1,000 citations helps but it did not cover even the cost of 1 of the animal control/ordinance enforcement/parking officers. Councilmember Nelson asked whether the addition of two Street Crime FTE would free up some patrol officers to spend more time on traffic enforcement. Chief Compaan answered it will help. Mayor Earling Packet Page 41 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 12 said the cost of an additional police officer is approximately $120,000. If the Council wants to add police officers, they need to tell him where to make cuts. Chief Compaan said it is important whatever is done is looked at in the overall context of the budget, determining where to get the most bang for buck in allocating resources. Councilmember Johnson expressed interest in traffic safety not just traffic enforcement. Education is a big part of traffic safety; some cities use Public Works staff and some use traffic officers. With regard to accidents between pedestrian and vehicles, it is one thing to give a ticket after the fact; she was concerned about public safety and found those accidents alarming. Chief Compaan said the issue of traffic safety include three pillars: education, enforcement and traffic engineering. The City receives traffic safety funds from the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission (WSTSC) for enforcement initiatives which are done in collaboration with surrounding agencies. Public Works has obtained grants for sidewalk, roadway and bicycle lane improvements. WSTSC has an active media campaign regarding DUI, pedestrian safety, etc. in the media. The City has not done a lot in printed media although there have been educational pieces in the local media and on the website. He summarized there is no magic wand; drivers need to be cognizant of their surroundings. Councilmember Johnson recalled traffic education as a child with regard to crossing the street and suggested seniors be reminded of what they learned when they were young. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the traffic calming program, recalling funding was doubled last year, funds were used on Sunset Avenue and meetings were held with residents on Olympic View Drive about speeding. Mr. Williams answered two radar feedback signs were installed on Olympic View Drive in 2012. The $20,000 in the 2015 budget is being used to buy another radar feedback signs and 3 bases so the sign can be moved to 3 locations on a periodic basis. The theory is the sign is more effective if it is not there all the time. The 2016 budget includes $20,000 which could be useful in implementing additional changes on Olympic View Drive. He recalled concerns expressed by residents in that area regarding bicycle and pedestrian safety, speeding, areas where crosswalks were needed, etc. Staff will try to develop a plan that can be initiated quickly that will include signage improvements and a marked crosswalk. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the main traffic calming project is the radar feedback signs. Mr. Williams said they work well; in the areas where they were initially installed, speeds dropped 3-4 mph and have stayed down since the signs have been in place. Councilmember Bloom referred to DP #61, hiring someone to do a video assessment of the citywide storm system, and asked why that would be done by a full-time, ongoing position rather than hiring a consultant. Mr. Williams explained staff has been trying to do videotaping using the existing video truck but it is not designed/outfitted for stormwater lines. Production using 4-6 member crews has been very low and he could not justify dedicating that much staff to the effort. The City must have 50% of the system footage videotaped by the end of 2016. There are companies who specialize in doing that. Councilmember Bloom said DP #61 is described as a full-time employee with salary and benefits $60,880 to $74,000 through 2020. She observed that appeared to be a full-time positon for five years for what seemed like a contract task. Mr. Williams referred to the justification, additional employee to help comply with Federal NPDES surface water quality mandates, begin to develop an asset inspection and rehabilitation program for stormwater collection system. That is the focus of the employee rather than operating the video truck. The employee would be reviewing the output of the video, populating an assessment management system, and producing maps that show where improvements need to be made in the system. Councilmember Bloom reiterated her question why that was an ongoing, permanent position that could be in place forever, when the video assessment would be done for five years. Mr. Williams said nothing is permanent; there is a balance between what is more cost effective. If staff is hired and a job goes away, Packet Page 42 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 13 attrition can be used to reduce the size of staff. His earlier description was the use of a consultant to collect the data; this position will be development of an assessment management system for all the stormwater pipes, identifying defects and where improvements need to be made so that a program like the waterline and sewerline replacement program can be developed for the stormwater infrastructure. Councilmember Bloom said if 40% needs to be done by 2016 and a contract person would do the bulk of that, why was a staff person needed for five years. Mr. Williams responded the first year of videoing will only generate images of 40% of the system; this person will post-process that data, making it useful for maintenance crews in the capital to develop a replacement/rehabilitation program for the stormwater pipes that are found to be in poor condition, similar to water and sewer. That will be an ongoing program. Councilmember Petso observed this is an action item but she assumed the Council will not take action on the budget tonight. Mayor Earling agreed, noting there were a lot of good questions asked tonight; he encouraged Councilmember to submit questions to staff. He proposed next week Councilmembers ask any additional questions, and begin making motions on the list of Council requested changes to the budget. Councilmember Petso said she slap-dashed her amendments together today and had not had an opportunity to discuss the ideas with the public, staff or councilmembers. She invited anyone with a concern/interest to contact her. For example, she removed $100,000 from Fund 125 without asking Ms. Hite what that does to her overall plans. She invited Ms. Hite to provide a response. Councilmember Bloom said similarly she sent out several questions today but staff had not had time to respond. One of her questions was similar to Mr. Swartz’s question about $19,000 for the National Survey. Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty said the genesis of the survey was the result of many discussions over the past year by Councilmembers, the Mayor and public. The proposed survey is the National Citizens Survey, a standardized 3-4 page survey with 50-60 standard questions and a handful of questions customized to the community. The survey questions are asked of a statistically significant sample in each community, allowing them to be benchmarked against other cities of the same size, region, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if Mr. Doherty was aware of the survey that was done when Mayor Cooper was in office. Mr. Doherty said he had heard a survey was done but it was not the National Citizens Survey. Councilmember Buckshnis offered to provide him the survey. Mr. Doherty said even if it had been the same survey, it would be time to consider surveying again. Council President Fraley-Monillas said her questions to Chief Compaan tonight were the result of discussion; some questions would arise during discussion and could not be answered in advance. She sent Chief Compaan a follow-up email requesting additional information. She cautioned the Council may have to meet on December 22 if they keep diddling with the budget. Councilmember Bloom referred to the Invisio tracking system for the SAP suggested by Darrol Haug and Software as a Service (SaaS) suggested by Mr. Swartz. She suggested having IT Supervisor Brian Tuley attend a Council meeting to answer questions. She will talk with Mr. Swartz about SaaS. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 6. ACTION ITEMS A. PROPOSED 2016-2021 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Packet Page 43 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 14 City Engineer Rob English relayed there was a public hearing on the 2016-2021 CFP/CIP at the Planning Board and City Council. This item is continued discussion; staff is present to answer questions. As several of her budget amendments impact the CFP/CIP, Councilmember Petso asked whether action was expected tonight or will it occur after the proposed budget amendments are voted on. Mr. English said the CIP could be approved tonight; the CFP must be adopted with the budget. Councilmember Petso concluded it appeared the final decision on the CFP/CIP would need to be made once decisions were made on those budget items. Mr. English agreed. Councilmember Petso asked if other amendments such as changing the Sunset Avenue project from a multiuse path back to a walkway could be done tonight. With regard to whether the CIP could/should be approved tonight, Mr. Williams responded it could be as he recalled most of Councilmember Petso’s amendments were related to how things were funded in the budget but less about the projects themselves. He acknowledged there are potential amendments to funding sources in the CIP but amendments to the CIP can be done anytime. The CFP has more strict requirements regarding when and how it can be modified. To Councilmember Petso question whether it would be appropriate to recommend tonight that the Sunset Avenue project be changed from a multiuse path back to a walkway, Mr. Williams answered in his opinion that was not appropriate tonight because the neither the pilot project nor the survey have been wrapped up. That issue would be an element of the design. The first decision is whether the City will pursue a permanent modification on Sunset Avenue to include a pathway on the water side. Whether it’s designed with/without bicycles is something that could be decided later. Councilmember Petso said the reason for her question is because the project started as a walkway and on some documents, it is still a walkway and other documents, it is designated as a multiuse pathway. She did not intend to get into all the possible design elements that may occur in the future but it would seem restoring it to a walkway project in these documents would be of use. Mr. Williams responded the name of the project has always been Sunset Avenue Walkway; that does not mean bicycles could not be allowed and multiuse path is more of a term of art than regulatory. It has been called the Sunset Avenue Walkway but it has always been assumed that some amount of bicycle usage would be appropriate. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there was nothing in the CIP for Sunset Avenue in 2016 but there was $100,000 in 2017. She asked if it was anticipated the process would drag out until 2017. Mr. Williams assumed a decision would be made during 2016 regarding what would be done and funding sought for design in 2017 and according to that rough schedule, construction in 2018. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the origin designs done by MacLeod Reckord would go away. Mr. Williams answered the pilot project focused on a section of the original Sunset Avenue Walkway; there was a connection to the east-west alignment on Caspers but that was not the problematic part of the project. The area where concerns were raised was the geometry in the railroad section of the project; the pilot project was designed to gather information regarding that. Councilmember Buckshnis said she had no problem with approving the CIP tonight. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding there were concerns about the Caspers section of the project. She preferred to wait until the Council had made decisions on the budget amendments. Hearing no further Council questions, Mayor Earling assumed the only remaining question was Sunset Avenue. B. 2015 NONREPRESENTED COMPENSATION STUDY This item was delayed to December 16 meeting. Packet Page 44 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 15 C. POTENTIAL ACTION REGARDING FUTURE OF CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty displayed multiple options offered for consideration: 1. Extend the Commission as is: a. Without sunset b. With sunset clause. Number of years till sunset to be determined c. Allow the Commission to set and determine subgroups as needed, within scope of their role per code. 2. Extend the Commission as is: a. With terms of appointees since 2014 extended to run two full years, others to be reappointed or new appointees b. All members being reappointed or newly appointed c. With term limits d. Without term limits 3. Extend the Commission as is: a. With set number and purpose of subgroups. If so two or three subgroups: i. If two subgroups: 1. Tourism 2. Business Growth & Revitalization ii. If three subgroups: 1. Tourism 2. Business Growth & Revitalization 3. Strategic Action Plan (for items assigned to the CEDC or Economic Development Department OR for stewardship of future public engagement processes) b. Allow the Commission to set and determine subgroups as needed, with the scope of their role per code. 4. Extend Commission as 9 members only 5. Sunset the Commission but create two or three new commissions a. If two: i. Tourism ii. Business Growth & Revitalization b. If three: i. Tourism ii. Business Growth & Revitalization iii. Strategic Action Plan 6. Related to commission subgroups, if they exist: a. Require public notice and meeting summaries b. Do not require public notice, yet require meeting summaries. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested extending the CEDC but revisiting it in the first quarter to allow the two new Councilmembers to provide their input. Councilmember Petso preferred to allow the CEDC to sunset unless there is a clear objective. Several people commented tonight on what they thought was objective was; one said generate revenue and another said improve quality of life, and the definition submitted by the CEDC was to create jobs. If and when new Councilmembers want to create a commission to do something and they know what that something is, they could start the commission up again. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE CEDC INDEFINITELY WITHOUT A SUNSET CLAUSE. Packet Page 45 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 16 Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was not interested in extending the CEDC just because, without a cause, purpose or mission. She preferred a defined purpose and goals, noting the CEDC has even asked the Council for direction regarding what they should be doing. She referred to Mr. Swartz’s comments that inferred the Council is to blame for the CEDC’s lack of focus because the Council has not provided adequate oversight. Councilmember Mesaros supported extending the CEDC with its current mission, to give advice and counsel to the City Council regarding opportunity for economic development. Having 17 citizens willing and able to meet, focus their energies, and provide input is valuable and should not be terminated. Economic development is a continual thing and there was testimony tonight during Audience Comments regarding its importance and the CEDC would like to see that continue. He agreed with Council President Fraley-Monillas that there has not been enough dialogue between the Council and CEDC and if they have wandered, it is the Council’s fault. The solution to that fault is not to disband but to have more dialogue between the Council and CEDC. If this motion is approved, he will likely follow with a motion to support Item 2a, terms of appointees since 2014 extended to run two full years, others to be reappointed or new appointees. Councilmember Bloom said she could not disagree with Councilmember Mesaros more. She agreed with Council President Fraley-Monillas that the CEDC should not just be extended as is as it has been clearly demonstrated the CEDC needs direction. Many commissioners have spoken to concerns regarding the size of the commission and the lack of focus and direction from Council. She agreed the Council was not providing the direction the CEDC needs. She preferred to sunset the CEDC and allow the new Council to decide whether they wanted to re-form it in a different manner/framework. It would be irresponsible for the Council to let things proceed as usual when the CEDC is clearly limping along and not serving the purpose it was intended to serve. Councilmember Mesaros said he couldn’t disagree with Councilmember Bloom more. If the Council perceives that the CEDC is not function well, it behooves the Council to communicate with them about what the Council wants them to do; disbanding the group is not the answer to that problem. There is too much talent and potential to do away with the CEDC and let the new Council deal with it. This Council should take responsible to extend the CEDC and give them the direction they seek. Councilmember Johnson commented there has been much discussion about whose fault it is that the CEDC is in this position and whether to extend it. ECDC Chapter 10.75 clearly outlines how the commission is created, the membership, and the powers and duties. The CEDC’s current format has evolved over time but it is not consistent with the way it was originally formed. To simply extend the CEDC would not solve the problems with code. For example, the code states members should not serve more than two years; that would need to be corrected. The code also specifically states what the commission should do; provide recommendations for increasing the City’s revenue. She recognized the CEDC was a dedicated group of people and she appreciated their efforts; however, if it were to continue, it needed to be revisited. Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged the Council to vote against the motion because to continue the CEDC as it currently exists benefits no one, neither the City nor the 17 members. The CEDC is a hardworking, talented group and she would like to have it restructured. She also felt extending all commissioners’ terms was not beneficial. She suggested in January the Council form a subcommittee with Mr. Doherty to consider how to restructure, revamp and restart the CEDC fresh as well as determine the number of commissioners and what they will work on. A number of commissioners are interested in leaving the CEDC and there are others interested in joining. She was in the Council audience when the ordinance creating the CEDC was developed and she thought it was a great start; possibly the CEDC has Packet Page 46 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 17 evolved and the ordinance needs to be revised. She was more interested in allowing the CEDC to sunset and the Council consider in January whether something could be put together that made more sense for the City. Councilmember Nelson did not support the motion extending the CEDC indefinitely but did support allow it to continue and providing more clear objectives. He understood some of the 17 members are interested in leaving the commission and others want to join; this would allow both to be accommodated. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was first Council liaison to the CEDC and Councilmember Johnson was the first Planning Board liaison. In her opinion, the CEDC was a good think tank; the Council only heard from 3-4 members tonight. The CEDC can look at a variety of things; she recalled while she was the liaison the CEDC did the SAP, Westgate and Five Corners Plans, downtown restrooms, etc. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO HAVE THE CEDC SUNSET IN SIX YEARS. Councilmember Buckshnis said that would accommodate three two-year terms. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, MESAROS, AND NELSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, JOHNSON AND PETSO VOTING NO. MAIN MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS AND MESAROS VOTING YES. Council President Fraley-Monillas reiterated her suggestion for a subcommittee of the Council to discuss this in January. Councilmember Petso asked whether a motion is required to sunset the CEDC. City Attorney Jeff Taraday read from the code: “The commission shall automatically expire December 31, 2015.” If it is the intent of the Council to have the CEDC expire, no further action is required. Council President Fraley-Monillas thanked all the members who have served, stating this has nothing to do with what they have done; they are a good group of people. Councilmember Johnson echoed Council President Fraley-Monillas’ comments. She thanked Rich Senderoff, Darrol Haug Bruce Witenberg who have served on the CEDC for six years. She expressed appreciation for their dedication for the past six years and thanked everyone who has served. Mayor Earling said he hoped the Council would be able to convene a group regarding economic development next year. If not, he was happy to name a Mayor’s Task Force related to the same issue. 7. STUDY ITEMS B. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF CITY OPTIONS FOR ADDRESSING CRUMB RUBBER Development Services Director Shane Hope explained on November 10, the City Council discussed the option of banning crumb rubber and if so, where and how. Review of literature was not discussed. Fundamental questions include: • What is level of health/safety risk? • What are current options? • What is the best path overall? Packet Page 47 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 18 To date there are no known peer-reviewed scientific articles that link crumb rubber to health risk. Various Edmonds residents have expressed concern about potential risks and desire for additional studies. Other residents have said they are okay with crumb rubber. She displayed actions by other jurisdictions that were reviewed at the November 10th meeting, noting no other jurisdictions have addressed what should be done by other agencies, only for themselves: • Middletown, CT – The Common Council voted to amend the $37 million bond ordinance on park improvements to ensure that the money could not be used to install artificial turf on city fields (August 2015) • NYC Parks & Rec – Issued a statement that it will use carpet-style or alternative infill materials, rather than crumb rubber, on all new fields (2008) • •Montgomery County, MD –Council approves only the use of plant-derived infill materials for new artificial turf playing fields in projects the county funds or contracts. No effect on non- county projects (adopted February 2015) • California State – State Senate Bill 47 sought to ban the use of crumb rubber for two years until the state conducts a comprehensive study on health effects. Note: SB 47 died in California Senate Committee on Appropriations (May 2015) • Los Angeles Unified School District discontinued the use of crumb rubber infill on athletic fields after discovering lead in some previously installed fields (2009) • Long Beach, CA – Parks & Recreation Commission approved a recommendation to the city manager for the use of GeoTurf, as the standard choice for all future synthetic field projects in the city (June 2015) She displayed photographic examples of current popular infill products for athletic fields including SBR Crumb rubber, Nike Grind, and GeoTurf. The Council packet contains additional information on these infill products. It is also possible to have a professional landscape specialist speak to the Council. Ms. Hope reviewed options: • City resolution on natural materials o To use this option, clarify whether only grass or dirt would be allowed or also natural, but non-native type products such as coconut hulls o Would only apply to City sports fields • Ordinance banning all forms of crumb rubber completely o Would impact City, all public agencies and private parties including private schools, religious facilities, businesses and homes o Would apply to playgrounds and other uses • Ordinance banning crumb rubber on playfields o Could ban in one of the following ways:  For use on all City-owned playfields  For use on all publicly-owned playfields (including properties of school districts, as well as the City  For use on any playfield in the City, including those owned by the City, any public agency, or a private party (e.g., a private school, commercial recreation facility, religious facility or private residence) • Demonstration project o Partnering on a future playfield that would use an alternative material (not crumb rubber) was mentioned in the November 10th presentation but not discussed Ms. Hope explained if an ordinance banning crumb rubber is prepared other decisions include: • Sunset date for any ordinance Packet Page 48 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 19 o General Council concurrence seemed to include 3-year sunset so results of more studies could be considered at that time and the ban could either be extended, made permanent or otherwise changed. • Whether to take emergency action o Possible, but probably not necessary since there are no known proposals for using crumb rubber during this next year Other questions that arose at the November 10 meeting included: • Would ban mean fewer hours and places to play sports? • Can ban be upheld in court? • Do we know enough about alternative materials? Further action may include one or more of the following: • Another work/study session to obtain specific information or have more detailed discussion • Direction to City Attorney to draft ordinance or resolution that would be considered for action in near future o With direction on general concepts Ms. Hope provided a summary of options: 1. Take no action 2. Follow up in work/study session 3. Direct attorney to draft resolution for City to use natural materials 4. Direct attorney to draft ordinance that: a. Bans all forms of everywhere b. Bans crumb rubber on all public playfields c. Bans crumb rubber on all City-owned fields d. Has another variation 5. If ordinance, consider optional details: a. Include 3-year sunset? b. Make it “emergency?” (Not recommended) 6. Help sponsor demonstration project that uses alternative materials Councilmember Nelson commented of the public agencies that have taken action, two are noteworthy due to their size, 1) LA School District, 700,000 students and is the second largest school district in the country, decided to no longer use crumb rubber infill, and 2) NYC Parks Department, the most visited Parks Department in the country with over 50 million visitors per year, decided to no longer use crumb rubber in their 113 artificial turf fields. Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed interested in the idea of a partnership and asked if the other Woodway fields could have a coconut fiber infill. Mr. Hope agreed that was what a partnership envisioned, there or any other fields the City is involved with. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented it would interesting to have the coconut infill next to the crumb rubber to see how it wears, the differences, etc. The question would be who pays for it, maintains it, monitors the differences, etc. Ms. Hope answered one possibility is the City could be a partner either financial by helping cover some increment of the difference between the cost of crumb rubber and another material or assisting with the cost of monitoring. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if Ms. Hope had reached out to any other entities to see if there was any interest in partnering. Ms. Hope said she has not. Councilmember Mesaros commented the Council has received a lot of information, on one side from Verdant and the school district on why they chose crumb rubber and how safe it is and on the other side information from citizens questioning the use of crumb rubber. The issue for the Council is not to decide Packet Page 49 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 20 whether crumb rubber is safe or not because the Council does not have the scientific knowledge to do that; the Council’s decision is about caution, how to establish a framework so that when there is doubt, structure and rules are established that err on the side of caution and protection. He expressed interested in a moratorium for a period of years and during that time have an independent person look at all the information and provide Council advice regarding which side of caution they should be on. The Council needs to act in cautious manner, protect citizens, ensure they are doing the right thing while also setting aside time to get that accomplished within a good framework. He supported a moratorium for a certain period of time where no crumb rubber fields were installed throughout the City both on private and public property and to look at the most recent information and how to land on the side of caution. Main Motion COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A 3-YEAR MORATORIUM BANNING SBR ON PLAYFIELDS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS. Councilmember Petso understood there may still be some issues regarding the duration of the moratorium and whether it should apply to public and private property as Councilmember Mesaros stated but she would like to get something on paper to be presented to Council for discussion and potential action. Councilmember Buckshnis spoke in favor of the motion. Councilmember Mesaros asked for clarification, whether Councilmember Petso’s motion regarding public property meant School District property, Hospital District property, and Port property. Councilmember Petso answered yes, property owned by a public agency including the City. Councilmember Bloom expressed support for the motion and wanted a moratorium prepared so the Council could vote on it next week. The Council has received voluminous information from citizens including Laura Johnson’s comments about the precautionary principle. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she will vote against any long term ban on public or private property unless it is the City’s own property. She supported property rights whether it was the Hospital, Port, Water District, Library, etc.; they all have their own rights. She was also concerned with the arbitrary nature of a 3-year moratorium without knowing what would be done during the 3 years or the purpose of a 3-year moratorium and questioned why not a 1-year, 5-year or 10-year moratorium. She expressed interest in a short-term moratorium and potentially having more independent research done. She asked whether a 1-year moratorium could be extended if the information necessary was not available to make a permanent decision. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered when people hear the word moratorium, they think of it in the context of the Growth Management Act (GMA) which is not necessarily applicable to the type of moratorium the Council is considering. If this were a GMA moratorium, it would need to be renewed every six months while additional information was obtained. If this is not a GMA moratorium, there is no preset, statutory timeframe. If the Council decided to enact a 1-year moratorium, Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether it could be extended. Mr. Taraday responded the Council has the power to ban this substance for any reasonable period of time that the Council needs to determine whether it should be used on public playfields. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented if the Council adopted a 3-year moratorium and gathered adequate information in the first year, the Council could remove the moratorium. Mr. Taraday agreed, just like the Council can amend or appeal any ordinance. Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged Council to adopt a short term moratorium of a year on all public property pending an independent investigation. Packet Page 50 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 21 Councilmember Bloom said the Council has all information it needs, the Yale Study and others, to know that crumb rubber has carcinogenic and toxic materials in it. Although more information will likely be developed, citizens have provided the Council enough information to justify a 3-year moratorium. It is likely further information on the possible long term effects, cancers, etc. will be available in 3 years but the Council has enough information to be cautious and use the precautionary principle. She envisioned three years would go by very quickly and was hopeful more information would be available to allow the City to turn the moratorium into a permanent ban. Councilmember Johnson asked Mr. Taraday to review the procedure for enacting a moratorium, the public hearing requirement and whether the Planning Board would be involved. Mr. Taraday reiterated he did not recommend characterizing this as a GMA moratorium; this is very different than a GMA moratorium. A GMA moratorium is a tool that a city uses when it is revamping zoning regulations and trying to envision what a neighborhood might look like and does not want any new development applications to be submitted during the planning process because they do not want development to occur that is inconsistent with a yet-to-be-adopted vision for the city. What the Council is discussing doing with crumb rubber is a temporary ban on the use of the substance. Although a lay person may not find much difference between a temporary ban and a moratorium, legally speaking he was uncomfortable with the term moratorium because it can easily be confused with a GMA moratorium. He did not object to the Council using it in their discussion but stated for the record if he drafts an ordinance in response to this motion, it will not have the word moratorium in it; it will say ban until the date the Council agrees on. Councilmember Johnson asked whether it would be prudent to have a public hearing, recalling there has been a great deal of public testimony. Mr. Taraday recalled the Council has had a public hearing on this topic already. If this were seen as a GMA moratorium which he did not consider it to be, the requirement would be for a public hearing within 30 days of adoption. The Council has had a public hearing in advance of adoption so that requirement would be satisfied in any case. Ms. Hope did not think there had been a public hearing on having a ban; there was a public hearing on the Woodway Fields. Councilmember Johnson summarized a public hearing was not needed if the Council chose to move forward on adopting a ban. Ms. Hope agreed. Mr. Taraday said he wanted to review the Council record as he recalled there was a public hearing on this at some point. Mayor Earling agreed the Council has had several meetings on this issue. Councilmember Nelson commented the federal government has failed to take action to protect citizens, the state government has yet to take action to protect citizens and the school district has refused to take action; therefore he believed the City must take action to protect citizens and children. He personally supported a 3-year moratorium on crumb rubber in the City. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed interest in a public hearing on the ban of crumb rubber. The Council holds public hearing for all kinds of things and since this affects a lot of people, the Council needs to do its due diligence by holding a public hearing on a potential ban of a widely used substance. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Taraday explained although the Council was using the term moratorium in its discussions, he was interpreting that to mean temporary ban. Moratorium is a loaded term that has connotations tied to the GMA; a GMA moratorium would need to be renewed every six months, etc. and he did not believe that was the City Council’s intent. He did not believe this had to be characterized as a development regulation as the Council was considering banning a substance it believed was hazardous and that was not a zoning ordinance. Packet Page 51 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 22 Regardless of the fact that the Council has a great deal of information provided by citizens, Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the Council does not have a public record. She expressed interest in an independent source reviewing the data so that if anything ever came up legally, all the bases were covered. Amendment #1 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MANAGE THE COMPILATION OF DATA COLLECTED BY BOTH CITIZENS AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ORGANIZE A RECOMMENDED EXPERT TO ASSIST IN THE EVALUATION. Mayor Earling clarified Councilmember Buckshnis’ motion was to engage an independent person or entity to do an examination and provide a recommendation and to have the City Attorney guide that process. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed. Councilmember Bloom said she will vote against the amendment; the original motion was to direct the City Attorney to return with an ordinance banning crumb rubber for 3 years. These details can to be discussed next week and it was not appropriate to include in the 3-year ban. She agreed with having a public hearing, and since this topic is already on next week’s agenda, the public hearing should be held next week. Councilmember Petso commented the intent of her motion was to have something on paper for Council discussion. She understood there may be amendments at that time or subsequently with regard to what to do in the future. She found it very frustrating that the Council would not have anything to discuss next week because the amendment will engage an independent person to tell the Council what to do. She recommended voting the amendment down, having the City Attorney draft something for review next week and if the Council wanted to hire someone next year to tell them what to think, go ahead. Councilmember Buckshnis said that was not what her motion said. Councilmember Petso asked the purpose of amending the motion to have the attorney manage collection of data and engage an independent person. Councilmember Buckshnis answered she had approximately 20 pages that supported banning crumb rubber. The Council has only banned one thing in the past; banning something is very important and can be a legal hot potato. She believed in documentation due to her background in auditing, and felt it was important to have a compilation and a record to show why crumb rubber was being banned. The Council has testimony but it needed to at least have paper trail to support the ban. Councilmember Johnson said a public hearing would in order to help the City Council concentrate all the information in one place. She also felt it would be helpful for the Council to have a paper trail and documentation. She agreed with Council President Fraley-Monillas that three years is a long time and the Council should be able to accomplish this in less time. She felt a sense of urgency from a couple Councilmembers but did not share that sense of urgency, perhaps because she will be on the Council in January. She supported having a public hearing and having someone prepare a document that records all of the testimony and information but did not like the idea of 3-year temporary ban. Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed concern with getting something on paper prior to a public hearing because that implies the Council knows what it is doing before citizens provide testimony. With regard to the amendment regarding managing collection of data and engaging an independent person, she agreed it was important to engage an independent person because not only has the Council received a great deal of information form citizens, it has also received information from other organizations that needs to be compiled and reviewed. She noted crumb rubber is also used in other applications such as playground surfaces and under swings. Packet Page 52 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 23 Councilmember Petso said she will vote against the amendment because it includes engaging an independent person; by the time the City hires an independent person, it will be January and there may be other crumb rubber playfields already built in Edmonds. Action on Amendment #1 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON AND MESAROS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, NELSON AND PETSO VOTING NO. Amendment #2 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MORATORIUM TO ONE YEAR. Councilmember Bloom said the intent was to have the City Attorney draft an ordinance for discussion next week with the public hearing. She understood there was disagreement with regard to the term but preferred the specifics be debated next week. The intent of the Council is to ban crumb rubber, adding these layers is just delaying that process. Councilmember Petso said she will vote against this amendment whether it occurs this week or next because she was convinced the kinds of study the Council will be waiting on to determine the extent of the health risk of this product will not be completed within one year. Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed support for one year. Councilmember Nelson said he prefers a 3-year moratorium but supports a moratorium. He will probably vote against this amendment. Action on Amendment #2 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON, AND MESAROS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, NELSON AND PETSO VOTING NO. Amendment #3 COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND TO APPLY ONLY TO CITY OWNED PLAYFIELDS. Councilmember Petso said she will vote against the motion primarily because that would be completely pointless. If the Council does not authorize crumb rubber on City property, it will not be installed on City property. Although she recognized it was not scientific, 96% of respondents did not support that option on a My Edmonds News poll on crumb rubber; only 4% supported a ban on City property. With regard to Councilmember Petso’s comment that a ban on City-owned property was pointless, Councilmember Johnson said a ban Citywide could be regarded as just as pointless since crumb rubber has already been installed on the playfields at two schools and no plans are in the works for artificial turf elsewhere. What the Council really has control over is the property that the City owns and that is the most defensible position for the City to take at this time. If it were six months ago, she may have felt differently. She encouraged the Council to consider what it actually has control over. Councilmember Bloom said she will vote against this with great frustration. She preferred to have further discussion next week in response to public comments at the public hearing. Packet Page 53 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 24 Councilmember Mesaros pointed out the current levy the School District is planning includes new crumb rubber baseball fields at Edmonds-Woodway High School. He will vote against the amendment; for a ban to be effective, it needs to be on all public property. Councilmember Nelson said he will oppose the amendment because he supported a moratorium on all public property. Action on Amendment #3 AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING YES. Councilmember Petso proposed the ban apply to both new and substantially renovated playfields within the City. It was the consensus of the Council that the main motion already addressed that. Councilmember Petso restated the main motion as amended: ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A 1-YEAR BAN ON SBR FROM PLAYFIELDS ON CITY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND TO COMPILE THE DATA AND ENGAGE AN INDEPENDENT PERSON. Action on Main Motion as amended MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO. A. OCTOBER 2015 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Finance Director Scott James displayed a General Fund – Funds Revenue Comparison, pointing out 2015 General Fund is higher than 2014. He displayed a pie chart, Sales Tax Analysis by Category for October 2015 YTD, pointing out retail automotive has generated $3.1 million in revenues and contractors have generated $1.1 million, YTD sales tax revenue is over $5.5 million. He displayed a chart illustrating the change in sales tax revenue October 2015 to October 2014, October 2015 is $725,000 higher than October 2014. He reviewed General Fund – Funds Expenditure Comparison, pointing out General Fund expenses are $2.5 million higher in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to Fire District 1 costs. He displayed General Fund Department Expense Summary, advising October is 83.3% through the year and expenses are at 76%. Mr. James displayed a comparison of REET revenues which are 43.8% higher than a year ago. He displayed a Utility Funds Revenue Comparison, advising revenues are nearly $1.7 million higher. He displayed the Utility Fund Expense Comparison, advising of a $46,000 decrease from last year to this year. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported increased crowds at the Holiday Market last Saturday. He encouraged the public to visit the market located between the Rusty Pelican and the Edmonds City Hall from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Saturdays. He reported approximately 1,000 people attended the tree lighting; everyone seemed to have a fabulous time. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Packet Page 54 of 229 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 1, 2015 Page 25 Student Representative Girouard advised of the Senior Class’ gift wrapping fundraiser. Councilmember Mesaros said he was unable to attend tree lighting due to a Christmas concert he attended. Downtown was abuzz Saturday afternoon when he was walking around, shopping and having lunch. Councilmember Buckshnis remarked downtown has been abuzz every weekend. Councilmember Nelson reported he attended the tree lighting with his children and was amazed at the turnout. Councilmember Johnson announced the Police Foundation Dash and Dine this Saturday; participants can sign up at 8:00 a.m. at the Boys & Girls Club and beginning walking or running at 9:00 a.m. Council President Fraley-Monillas reported her Thanksgiving dinner went well with the things she bought at the Holiday Market the week before. She also attended the tree lighting; it was a great event and many more attended than have attended in the past ten years. 10. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 11. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Packet Page 55 of 229    AM-8174     3. B.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:Consent   Submitted For:Scott James Submitted By:Nori Jacobson Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #217395 through #217508 dated December 3, 2015 for $547,158.83. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #61974 through #61985 for $495,324.94, benefit checks #61986 through #61993 and wire payments of $546,088.13 for the pay period November 16, 2015 to November 30, 2015. Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2015 Revenue: Expenditure:1,588,571.90 Fiscal Impact: Claims $547,158.83 Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $495,324.94 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $546,088.13 Total Payroll $1,041,413.07 Attachments Claim cks 12-03-15 Project Numbers 12-03-15 Payroll Summary 1 Packet Page 56 of 229 Payroll Summary 1 Payroll Summary 12-04-15 Payroll Benefit 12-04-15 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Scott James 12/03/2015 12:12 PM City Clerk Scott Passey 12/03/2015 12:13 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/03/2015 12:20 PM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/03/2015 12:26 PM Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 12/03/2015 10:23 AM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 57 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217395 12/3/2015 075085 1LINGUA LLC 112 Tax only TAX ONLY FOR INVOICE 112 Sales tax portion only for invoice 112 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 4.75 ONLINE SERVICE SEPT & OCT 2015118 ONLINE SERVICE SEPT & OCT 2015 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 100.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 9.50 Total :114.25 217396 12/3/2015 072627 911 ETC INC 35066 MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT Monthly 911 database maint 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 100.00 Total :100.00 217397 12/3/2015 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 359767 MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROL CUST 1-23276 MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROL CUST 1-23276 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 82.12 Total :82.12 217398 12/3/2015 065568 ALLWATER INC 112415089 WWTP-DRINKING WATER Water 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 34.35 cooler rental 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 4.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 0.38 Total :38.73 217399 12/3/2015 073626 ALPHA ECOLOGICAL 2653647 PS - Bi Mo Maint Agreement PS - Bi Mo Maint Agreement 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 108.41 Total :108.41 217400 12/3/2015 074695 AMERICAN MESSAGING W4101046PL WATER WATCH PAGER FEES 1Page: Packet Page 58 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217400 12/3/2015 (Continued)074695 AMERICAN MESSAGING WATER WATCH PAGER FEES 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 4.47 Total :4.47 217401 12/3/2015 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 3947742 LEOFF 1 Medical Premiums LEOFF 1 Medical Premiums 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 9,032.24 LEOFF 1 Medical Premiums 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 1,310.62 Total :10,342.86 217402 12/3/2015 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1988320246 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.12 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.72 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988324407 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48 2Page: Packet Page 59 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217402 12/3/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988324408 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 15.62 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 12.06 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 1.48 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.15 WWTP-UNIFORMS, MATS AND TOWELS1988331259 Uniforms 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.80 Mats and Towels 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 76.74 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.36 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7.29 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE1988331260 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 55.97 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1988331261 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.12 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.72 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988335365 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 3Page: Packet Page 60 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217402 12/3/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988335366 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.28 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 11.96 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.14 Total :291.33 4Page: Packet Page 61 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217403 12/3/2015 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0826805-IN WWTP-DIESEL FUEL ulsd#2 dyed bulk 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 2,706.81 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 257.14 Total :2,963.95 217404 12/3/2015 075501 ATSUKO HUNT 5-09500 #500033443-DB UTILITY REFUND #500033443-DB Utility refund - received 411.000.233.000 134.95 Total :134.95 217405 12/3/2015 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 84267 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 68.40 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 341.04 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 341.04 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 6.37 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 6.37 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 6.57 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 66.39 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 66.39 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS84824 UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 37.28 UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 37.28 UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 38.41 5Page: Packet Page 62 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217405 12/3/2015 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER UB Outsourcing area #500 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 139.79 UB Outsourcing area #500 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 139.79 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 3.58 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 3.58 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 3.69 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS84958 UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 33.53 UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 33.53 UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 34.53 UB Outsourcing area #600 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 129.55 UB Outsourcing area #600 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 129.54 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 3.22 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 3.22 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 3.31 Total :1,676.40 217406 12/3/2015 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 86162 2015 SERVICE AWARDS & EMPLOYEE OF THE 2015 SERVICE AWARDS & EMPLOYEE OF THE 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 600.40 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 57.04 6Page: Packet Page 63 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :657.4421740612/3/2015 001835 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 217407 12/3/2015 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON 20243 TAEKWON-DO 20243 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 20243 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 58.19 20247 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION20247 TAEKWON-DO 20247TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 212.00 Total :270.19 217408 12/3/2015 012005 BALL AND GILLESPIE POLYGRAPH 2015-166 INV 2015-166 EDMONDS PD - JOHNSEN PRE-EMPLOY EXAM 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 225.00 Freight 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 7.00 Total :232.00 217409 12/3/2015 071348 BERGERABAM 312842 Fishing Pier - Prof Svcs thru 11/20/15 Fishing Pier - Prof Svcs thru 11/20/15 016.000.66.518.30.41.00 14,292.47 Total :14,292.47 217410 12/3/2015 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 7260 E5FA.SERVICES THRU 10/23/15 E5FA.Services thru 10/23/15 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 1,913.06 Total :1,913.06 217411 12/3/2015 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 5119 Fleet Auto Propane 546.4 Gal Fleet Auto Propane 546.4 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 525.94 Fleet Auto Propane - 596.9 Gal8644 Fleet Auto Propane - 596.9 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 579.73 Fleet Auto Propane 855 Gal8668 Fleet Auto Propane 855 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 826.74 7Page: Packet Page 64 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :1,932.4121741112/3/2015 074307 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 217412 12/3/2015 075201 BRAINSTORM NOVELTIES 11232015 PERFORMANCE AT HOLIDAY MARKET 11/28/15 Performance at 11/28/15 Holiday Market 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 100.00 Total :100.00 217413 12/3/2015 075497 BRAUN & LISA HOPKE 3-45800 #2015095688 UTILITY REFUND #2015095688 Utility refund - received 411.000.233.000 235.77 Total :235.77 217414 12/3/2015 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 20332 YOGA 20332 YOGA INSTRUCTION 20332 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 406.35 20337 YOGA INSTRUCTION20337 YOGA 20337 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 691.20 20340 YOGA INSTRUCTION20340 YOGA 20340 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 394.20 20343 YOGA INSTRUCTION20343 YOGA 20343 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 546.21 20346 YOGA INSTRUCTION20346 YOGA 20346 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 255.96 20352 YOGA INSTRUCTION20352 YOGA 20352 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 212.85 Total :2,506.77 217415 12/3/2015 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 15197387 CANON- PLANNING PRINTER FOR AUGUST LEASE-CANON- PLANNING PRINTER FOR AUGUST 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 36.16 Lease Council Office copier/printer15487318 8Page: Packet Page 65 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217415 12/3/2015 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Lease Council Office copier/printer 001.000.11.511.60.45.00 30.65 CANON LEASE CHARGES C103015487319 canon lease pmt for C1030 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 9.33 canon lease pmt for C1030 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 9.33 canon lease pmt for C1030 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 9.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 0.88 COPIER RENTAL FEE15496559 COPIER RENTAL FEE 001.000.23.523.30.45.00 195.51 CANON LEASE CHARGES C505115513987 Canon lease pmt for C5051 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 83.35 Canon lease pmt for C5051 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 83.35 Canon lease pmt for C5051 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 83.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 7.92 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 7.92 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 7.91 Total :566.71 217416 12/3/2015 075092 CASCADE BICYCLE CLUB ED FNDN 21031 E3DC.SERVICES THRU 11/16/15 9Page: Packet Page 66 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217416 12/3/2015 (Continued)075092 CASCADE BICYCLE CLUB ED FNDN E3DC.Services thru 11/16/15 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 6,539.73 Total :6,539.73 217417 12/3/2015 071443 CED - KENT 2340-641312 FAC - Fluor Lamps (30) FAC - Fluor Lamps (30) 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 107.70 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.23 Total :117.93 217418 12/3/2015 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 45940140 INV#45940140 ACCT#7898305185 EDMONDS PD FUEL FOR NARCS VEHICLE-POFF 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 112.87 TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 1.13 Total :114.00 217419 12/3/2015 062975 COLLISION CLINIC INC 28899 Unit 947 - Repairs deductables Unit 947 - Repairs deductables 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 217420 12/3/2015 075481 CONNIE POULSEN MGMT TRAINING 1531 Delivery of one half-day workshop: Delivery of one half-day workshop: 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 217421 12/3/2015 005965 CUES INC 445511 Sewer - Tires for Camera Trailer Sewer - Tires for Camera Trailer 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 613.44 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 18.26 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 60.02 10Page: Packet Page 67 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217421 12/3/2015 (Continued)005965 CUES INC Sewer - Switch445823 Sewer - Switch 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 305.53 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 13.46 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 30.31 Total :1,041.02 217422 12/3/2015 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3306893 E3FE.RFQ ADVERTISEMENT E3FE.RFQ Advertisement 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 518.70 E5JB.RFQ ADVERTISEMENT3306894 E5JB.RFQ Advertisement 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 409.50 Total :928.20 217423 12/3/2015 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2016112 WWTP-DOE OPERATOR CERTIFICATION RENEWAL Jon Clay- Cert No 5796 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Eric Duenas- Cert No 8279 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Brain Funk- Cert No 8335 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Daniel Garcia-Cert No 6051 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 James Nordquist- Cert No 5627 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Pamela Randolph- Cert No 3638 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Roderick Sebers - Cert No 5968 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Robert Slenker- Cert No 7566 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Michael VanPelt- Cert No 2123 11Page: Packet Page 68 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217423 12/3/2015 (Continued)006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Curt Zuvela- Cert No 7743 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 30.00 Total :300.00 217424 12/3/2015 070864 DEX MEDIA 440012176574 C/A 440001304654 Basic e-commerce hosting 11/02/15 - 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.95 C/A 440001307733440012176582 11/2015 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.95 Total :69.90 217425 12/3/2015 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 15-3607 CITY COUNCIL CANCELED 11/17 & CITY COUNC 11/17/15 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CANCELED 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 448.80 Total :448.80 217426 12/3/2015 075468 DRAMA KIDS 20239 DRAMA KIDS 20239 DRAMA KIDS INSTRUCTION 20239 DRAMA KIDS INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 295.00 Total :295.00 217427 12/3/2015 007253 DUNN LUMBER 3603453 City Hall - Supplies City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 99.54 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.45 Total :108.99 217428 12/3/2015 068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL 15-24822 Water Quality - Water Samples Monitoring Water Quality - Water Samples Monitoring 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 1,068.00 Total :1,068.00 217429 12/3/2015 071969 EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS ANU YADAV RESIDENCY ARTS ED ECA - ANU YADAV RESIDENCY 12Page: Packet Page 69 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217429 12/3/2015 (Continued)071969 EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS ARTS ED ECA - ANU YADAV RESIDENCY 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 750.00 Total :750.00 217430 12/3/2015 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-01808 LIFT STATION #11 6807 157TH PL SW / METE LIFT STATION #11 6807 157TH PL SW / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 37.77 CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD / METER 73-03575 CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 294.35 HAINES WHARF PARK DRINKING FOUNTAIN3-07490 HAINES WHARF PARK DRINKING FOUNTAIN 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 76.88 LIFT STATION #12 16100 75TH AVE W / METE3-07525 LIFT STATION #12 16100 75TH AVE W / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 41.02 LIFT STATION #15 7701 168TH ST SW / METE3-07709 LIFT STATION #15 7701 168TH ST SW / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 37.77 LIFT STATION #4 8313 TALBOT RD / METER 23-09350 LIFT STATION #4 8313 TALBOT RD / METER 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 76.88 LIFT STATION #10 17612 TALBOT RD / METER3-09800 LIFT STATION #10 17612 TALBOT RD / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 37.77 LIFT STATION #9 8001 SIERRA DR / METER 63-29875 LIFT STATION #9 8001 SIERRA DR / METER 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 41.02 SPRINKLER FOR RHODIES 18410 92ND AVE W3-38565 SPRINKLER FOR RHODIES 18410 92ND AVE W 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 37.77 Total :681.23 217431 12/3/2015 070676 EFFICIENCY INC 6231115 6 MONTH MAINT CONTRACT FOR FTR GOLD 6 MONTH MAINT CONTRACT FOR FTR GOLD 13Page: Packet Page 70 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217431 12/3/2015 (Continued)070676 EFFICIENCY INC 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 533.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 50.64 Total :583.64 217432 12/3/2015 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR21213 COPY CHARGES FOR C1030 copier charges for C1030 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 9.33 copier charges for C1030 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 9.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 0.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 0.88 copier charges for C1030 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 9.33 ADDTL IMAGES- PLANNINGAR21217 Addtl images- planning 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 15.33 Additional images, Council OfficeAR21218 Additional images, Council Office 001.000.11.511.60.45.00 9.21 ADDTL IMAGES- BUILDINGAR21219 addtl images- building 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 26.87 WWTP-OFFICE MACHINE USEAR21245 10/10 to 11/9/2015 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 86.61 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 8.23 COPIER MAINTAR21288 COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.512.50.45.00 6.77 14Page: Packet Page 71 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217432 12/3/2015 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES COPIER MAINTAR22463 COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.523.30.45.00 38.38 MK5532 CITY CLERK OVERAGEAR22536 CITY CLERKS COPIER CONTRACT OVERAGE 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 5.79 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 0.55 FLEET COPY USEAR22539 Fleet Copy Use~ 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.36 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.79 ADDITIONAL IMAGES- DEV SERVAR22540 addtl images- dev serv 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 165.87 Total :403.41 217433 12/3/2015 072951 ENECON USA 64535 WWTP-MECHANICAL DUR-ALLOY dur-alloy 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 725.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 40.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 68.88 Total :833.88 217434 12/3/2015 075136 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOC 117620 CRITICAL AREAS UPDATE Critical Areas Update 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 3,970.30 Total :3,970.30 217435 12/3/2015 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH665331 E5JA.RFQ ADVERTISEMENT E5JA.RFQ Advertisement 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 182.32 15Page: Packet Page 72 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217435 12/3/2015 (Continued)009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD E3FE.RFQ ADVERTISEMENTEDH668073 E3FE.RFQ Advertisement 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 233.92 LEGAL NOTICE- PLN20140015edh669209 LEGAL NOTICE- PLN20140015 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 75.68 LEGAL NOTICE- PLN20150052edh669221 LEGAL NOTICE- PLN20150052 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 79.12 CITY NOTICES REVENUE SOURCESEDH669867 CITY NOTICES REVENUE SOURCES, INCL. 001.000.25.514.30.41.40 37.84 Total :608.88 217436 12/3/2015 063953 EVERGREEN STATE HEAT & A/C 29409 City Hall - HVAC Troubleshoot, Repairs City Hall - HVAC Troubleshoot, Repairs 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 380.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 36.10 Total :416.10 217437 12/3/2015 065958 EZ-LINER 059218 Unit 46 - Liner Supplies Unit 46 - Liner Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 397.89 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 122.50 Total :520.39 217438 12/3/2015 009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 113015 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 20,000.00 Total :20,000.00 217439 12/3/2015 011900 FRONTIER 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETRY CIRCUIT 16Page: Packet Page 73 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217439 12/3/2015 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 30.87 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 161.33 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 299.62 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 19.71 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.59 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 46.64 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 86.62 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE LINE425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE LINE 250 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 66.67 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES425-771-0158 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 129.40 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH AVE N425-776-6829 CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 129.40 LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINE509-022-0049 LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.21 Total :1,033.06 217440 12/3/2015 075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR 10506 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 105.66 Total :105.66 17Page: Packet Page 74 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217441 12/3/2015 073922 GAVIOLA, NIKKA 20449 TAEKWON-DO 20449 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 20449 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 306.00 Total :306.00 217442 12/3/2015 073821 GEODESIGN INC 1115-116 E3DB.SERVICES THRU 11/20/15 E3DB.Services thru 11/20/15 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 2,564.95 Total :2,564.95 217443 12/3/2015 075490 GOODENOUGH COMPANY INC 1246 CONSULTING SERVICES - 10/15-11/9/15 CONSULTING SERVICES - 10/15-11/9/15 001.000.31.514.20.41.00 748.13 CONSULTING SERVICES - 10/15-11/9/15 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 748.12 Total :1,496.25 217444 12/3/2015 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 127332 Unit 29 - 2 Tires Unit 29 - 2 Tires 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 168.46 State Tire Fees 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 2.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 16.00 Unit 136 - Tires127602 Unit 136 - Tires 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 518.08 State Tire Fees 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 4.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 49.22 Total :757.76 217445 12/3/2015 072515 GOOGLE INC 3359227417 BILLING ID# 5030-2931-5908 Google Apps - Nov-2015 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 31.00 18Page: Packet Page 75 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :31.0021744512/3/2015 072515 072515 GOOGLE INC 217446 12/3/2015 012199 GRAINGER 9894494906 Boys & Girls Club- Supplies Boys & Girls Club- Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 8.35 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.80 City Hall - Supplies9901937509 City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 220.84 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 20.98 Total :250.97 217447 12/3/2015 012560 HACH COMPANY 9627172 WWTP-LAB SUPPLIES Lab Supplies 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 226.65 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 52.77 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 26.54 Total :305.96 217448 12/3/2015 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 157617 Unit 6 - Parts Unit 6 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 67.78 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.44 Fleet Returns157675 Fleet Returns 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -2.24 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -0.21 Unit 455 - Instrument Cluster157943 Unit 455 - Instrument Cluster 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 378.29 19Page: Packet Page 76 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217448 12/3/2015 (Continued)012900 HARRIS FORD INC 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 35.94 Unit 23 - Installed new engine and feesFOCS400303 Unit 23 - Installed new engine and fees 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 7,309.79 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 150.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 694.43 Total :8,640.22 217449 12/3/2015 062899 HUFF, ARIELE 20249 WRITE ABOUT 20249 WRITE ABOUT YOUR LIFE INSTRUCTION 20249 WRITE ABOUT YOUR LIFE INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 112.20 Total :112.20 217450 12/3/2015 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2713571 Office Supplies Office Supplies 001.000.22.521.10.31.00 297.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.521.10.31.00 28.27 OFFICE SUPPLIES2716983 OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 262.92 OFFICE SUPPLIES2716994 OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 22.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES2718304 OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 130.17 Total :741.27 217451 12/3/2015 075493 JENNIFER GIFFORD PLN20150026 REFUND- OVERPAYMENT OF HEARING EXAMINERS REFUND- OVERPAYMENT OF HEARING 001.000.257.620 175.50 20Page: Packet Page 77 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :175.5021745112/3/2015 075493 075493 JENNIFER GIFFORD 217452 12/3/2015 075356 JENNIFER ZIEGLER PUBLIC 005 STATE LOBBYIST NOVEMBER State lobbyist November 2015 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 2,416.67 Total :2,416.67 217453 12/3/2015 068024 KRUCKEBERG BOTANIC GARD FOUND 20276 BIRDS OF THE K 20276 BIRDS OF THE KRUCKEBERG INSTRUCTIO 20276 BIRDS OF THE KRUCKEBERG 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 78.00 20493 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION20493 WREATH WORKSHO 20493 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 182.00 20494 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION20494 WREATH WORKSHO 20494 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 182.00 20495 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION20495 WREATH WORKSHO 20495 WREATH WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 68.25 Total :510.25 217454 12/3/2015 075260 LAU, PING 10580 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 109.95 Total :109.95 217455 12/3/2015 074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS 16691 INV#16691 - EDMONDS PD TEST MTS2000 466CDS0608 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 90.00 FLAT RATE LCD BOARD/REPAIR 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 INV#16692 - EDMONDS PD16692 TEST MTS2000 466CDS0653 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 108.00 POTENTIOMETER 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 16.29 21Page: Packet Page 78 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217455 12/3/2015 (Continued)074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS SWITCH, 3P MODE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 8.00 ASSEMBLY/BOARD, LCD DISPLAY 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 125.00 INV#16693 - EDMONDS PD16693 TEST MTS2000 466CDS0666 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 90.00 ASSEMBLY,LTD-KEYPAD FT HOUSING 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 179.50 INV#16694 - EDMONDS PD16694 TEST MTS2000 466CDS0660 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 90.00 FLAT RATE LCD REPAIR 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 INV#16696 - EDMONDS PD16696 TEST MTS2000 466CDS0609 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 90.00 FLAT RATE LCD REPAIR 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 INV#16697 - EDMONDS PD16697 TEST MTS2000 466CDS0613 RADIO 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 45.00 FLAT RATE LCD REPAIR 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 75.00 Total :1,141.79 217456 12/3/2015 075502 LYNCH, ALLISON 20505 HYPNOSIS 20505 HYPNOSIS FOR PAIN & STRESS INSTRUC 20505 HYPNOSIS FOR PAIN & STRESS 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 24.50 Total :24.50 217457 12/3/2015 061900 MARC 0566618-IN WWTP-OPERATING SUPPLIES T-A-P TRIPLE ACTION PENETRANT AND 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 149.00 Freight 22Page: Packet Page 79 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217457 12/3/2015 (Continued)061900 MARC 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 8.16 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 14.93 Total :172.09 217458 12/3/2015 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1529 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 86.90 INTERPRETER FEE1530 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 86.90 Total :173.80 217459 12/3/2015 068670 MARSHBANK CONSTRUCTION INC E1AA.Pmt 9 E1AA.PMT 9 THRU 11/30/15 E1AA.Pmt 9 thru 11/30/15 112.200.68.595.33.65.00 16,517.28 Total :16,517.28 217460 12/3/2015 074099 MARTIN, GARY 10/22 YOGA SUB 10/22/15 YOGA SUBSTITUTION 10/22/15 YOGA SUBSTITUTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 62.64 Total :62.64 217461 12/3/2015 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 43769497 WWTP-SUPPLIES; MECHANICAL MISC SUPPLIES: OIL-REMOVAL GUNS; 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 627.27 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 10.67 Total :637.94 217462 12/3/2015 072223 MILLER, DOUG 11/4-11/25 GYM MONIT 11/4-11/25/15 BASKETBALL GYM MONITOR 11/4-11/25/15 BASKETBALL GYM MONITOR 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 85.00 Total :85.00 217463 12/3/2015 075286 MOORE, KATHLEEN 20475 PASTELS 20475 PASTELS PAINTING INSTRUCTION 23Page: Packet Page 80 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217463 12/3/2015 (Continued)075286 MOORE, KATHLEEN 20475 PASTELS PAINTING INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 224.40 Total :224.40 217464 12/3/2015 069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA-33-652699 WWTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MECHANICAL Bearings/Parts 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 515.30 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 17.07 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 50.58 Total :582.95 217465 12/3/2015 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 14-1613-8 E4JC.SERVICES THRU 10/31/15 E4JC.Services thru 10/31/15 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 876.50 E4JC.SERVICES THRU 10/31/1515-1662-7 E4JC.Services thru 10/31/15 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 3,579.50 E5KA.SERVICES THRU 10/31/1515-1715-3 E5KA.Services thru 10/31/15 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 2,950.00 Total :7,406.00 217466 12/3/2015 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 4305757 CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RENTAL CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RENTAL 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 345.32 Total :345.32 217467 12/3/2015 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 10036297 Monthly Fees for Sec 125 11-1-15 to Monthly Fees for Sec 125 11-1-15 to 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 77.20 Total :77.20 217468 12/3/2015 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0565189-IN Fleet Filter Inventory 24Page: Packet Page 81 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217468 12/3/2015 (Continued)024302 NELSON PETROLEUM Fleet Filter Inventory 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 68.40 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 6.50 WWTP-SUPPLIES; OPERATING0568130-IN ANALYSIS KIT C2-CHEVRON 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 328.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 31.21 Fleet Filter Inventory0568694-IN Fleet Filter Inventory 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 106.81 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 10.14 Total :551.56 217469 12/3/2015 073920 NELSON, HSIANG-YUN 20446 POSTURE 20446 CHANGE YOUR POSTURE INSTRUCTION 20446 CHANGE YOUR POSTURE INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 78.00 Total :78.00 217470 12/3/2015 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 67572 WWTP-SODIUM BISULFITE SODIUM BISULFITE 423.000.76.535.80.31.54 1,930.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.54 183.40 Total :2,113.90 217471 12/3/2015 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 2-1434219 SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 MADRONA ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET2-1434303 MADRONA ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET2-1435235 25Page: Packet Page 82 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217471 12/3/2015 (Continued)061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 2,938.85 CIVIC CENTER 6TH & EDMONDS HONEY BUCKET2-1436894 CIVIC CENTER 6TH & EDMONDS HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 PINE STREET PARK HONEY BUCKET2-1437512 PINE STREET PARK HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 CIVIC FIELD 6TH & BELL HONEY BUCKET2-1439352 CIVIC FIELD 6TH & BELL HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 Total :3,508.10 217472 12/3/2015 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 313527 INV#313527 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD 2016 WALL CALENDAR 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 9.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 0.87 INV#401136 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD401136 READY INDEX DIVIDERS-FTO 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 14.43 1.5V BATTERIES FOR DIGITAL CALIPER 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 3.11 WHITE ADDRESS LABELS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 14.84 PATROL MEMO PADS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 12.88 HEAVY DUTY STAPLES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 28.40 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 6.72 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 0.29 P&R: PAPER, LETTER & LEGAL428696 P&R: PAPER, LETTER & LEGAL 26Page: Packet Page 83 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217472 12/3/2015 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 121.70 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 11.57 Total :224.01 217473 12/3/2015 075498 OSTRER, ALLISON 10810 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 109.64 Total :109.64 217474 12/3/2015 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00077824 Unit 138 - Parts Unit 138 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 101.42 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.63 Unit 138 - Bushings00077863 Unit 138 - Bushings 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 63.38 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.92 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.68 Total :188.03 217475 12/3/2015 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 21-23450 WWTP-CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRADE PHASE 04-PLC-301 REPLACEMENT SECONDARY 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 84,396.63 Total :84,396.63 217476 12/3/2015 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC 108373 INV#108373 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2000 HONDA CIVIC #203ZWJ 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77 Unit 455 - Towing108493 27Page: Packet Page 84 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217476 12/3/2015 (Continued)070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC Unit 455 - Towing 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 166.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 15.77 Total :363.54 217477 12/3/2015 074614 PENSER NORTH AMERICA 41739 Workers compensation claims management Workers compensation claims management 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 3,519.81 Total :3,519.81 217478 12/3/2015 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC I157180 City Hall - Supplies City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 20.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.93 City Hall - SuppliesI165824 City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 8.62 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.82 Grandstands - SuppliesI191376 Grandstands - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 211.69 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 20.11 Total :263.50 217479 12/3/2015 064167 POLLARD WATER 0029618 Water Supplies Water Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 115.90 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 12.78 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 12.22 28Page: Packet Page 85 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :140.9021747912/3/2015 064167 064167 POLLARD WATER 217480 12/3/2015 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 217020 WWTP POSTAGE TO: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 30.98 Total :30.98 217481 12/3/2015 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 200000704821 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST / ME FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,365.59 YOST PARK/POOL 9535 BOWDOIN WAY / METER200002411383 YOST PARK/POOL 9535 BOWDOIN WAY / METER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 151.92 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST / METER 0200007876143 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST / METER 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 261.20 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW / MET200009595790 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 504.10 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W / METE200011439656 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 172.87 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / METER 00052200016558856 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 186.42 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / METER 0200016815843 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 709.09 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 72ND AVE W /200017676343 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 72ND AVE W 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 276.70 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE R200019375639 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 138.59 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / METER 001200019895354 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / METER 29Page: Packet Page 86 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217481 12/3/2015 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 330.19 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / METE200020415911 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 18.84 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 71.60 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 71.60 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 71.60 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 71.60 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 71.58 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 000390395200021829581 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 000390395 423.000.76.535.80.47.63 41.74 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE S / METER200024711901 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE S / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 149.23 Total :4,664.46 217482 12/3/2015 075231 RAYOR, JANET 11192015 PERFORMANCE AT 11/28/15 HOLIDAY MARKET Performance at 11/28/15 Holiday Market 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 100.00 Total :100.00 217483 12/3/2015 075499 RCP SHELTERS INC 10653 FAC BANDSHELL ENGINEERING FAC BANDSHELL ENGINEERING 125.000.64.576.80.41.00 4,737.15 Total :4,737.15 217484 12/3/2015 031600 RELIABLE FLOOR COVERINGS 124073 City Hall - Roppe City Hall - Roppe 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 110.40 30Page: Packet Page 87 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217484 12/3/2015 (Continued)031600 RELIABLE FLOOR COVERINGS 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.49 Total :120.89 217485 12/3/2015 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 8177 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 900.00 Total :900.00 217486 12/3/2015 075500 SCHULER, KATHLEEN 20492 DR SEUSS 20492 DR SEUSS INSTRUCTION 20492 DR SEUSS INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 150.00 Total :150.00 217487 12/3/2015 061135 SEAVIEW CHEVROLET 272432 Unit 413 - Cooler Unit 413 - Cooler 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 579.11 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 55.02 Total :634.13 217488 12/3/2015 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 7954-4 City Hall - Supplies City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 30.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.89 Total :33.33 217489 12/3/2015 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-315062 Unit 67- Supplies Unit 67- Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 141.77 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.47 Unit 902 - Supplies14-315334 Unit 902 - Supplies 31Page: Packet Page 88 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217489 12/3/2015 (Continued)036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 101.28 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.62 Unit 791 - Autosock14-315493 Unit 791 - Autosock 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 76.55 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.27 Total :349.96 217490 12/3/2015 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-7495-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W / METER 1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.29 CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE RD / METER 1002003-8645-6 CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE RD / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 56.50 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION METER2004-9314-6 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION METER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.98 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST / METER 12006-3860-9 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST / METER 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 220.68 TRAFFIC LIGHT 200 3RD AVE S / METER 10002006-7801-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 200 3RD AVE S / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.98 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW / METER 12007-4860-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.85 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS WAY / METER2009-4334-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS WAY / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 59.94 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W / METER 12011-9222-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.88 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL W / METE2012-6598-0 32Page: Packet Page 89 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217490 12/3/2015 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL W / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 183.17 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH PL W / M2013-7496-4 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH PL W / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 19.37 LIFT STATION 7403 BALLINGER WAY / METER2014-2731-7 LIFT STATION 7403 BALLINGER WAY / METER 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 16.29 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / METER 10002015-7289-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 45.43 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W / METER 12015-8215-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W / METER 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 25.13 LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL SW / METE2015-9448-8 LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL SW / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 17.79 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT CEMETERY2016-1027-6 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT CEMETERY 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 8.85 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN ST / METER2016-5690-7 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN ST / METER 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 126.95 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW / METER 12017-5147-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 69.54 415 5TH AVE S2017-6210-1 415 5TH AVE S 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 20.19 WWTP FLOW METER 23219 74TH AVE W / METER2019-2991-6 WWTP FLOW METER 23219 74TH AVE W / 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 16.29 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W / METE2020-7719-4 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 515.50 33Page: Packet Page 90 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217490 12/3/2015 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / METER 10002020-8787-0 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / METER 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 120.34 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / METER 100042022-8909-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 59.93 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTING 120 5TH2024-2158-2 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTING 120 5TH 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 86.18 MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGATION & SUMP2026-2041-5 MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGATION & SUMP 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 16.29 TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW (FS #16)2028-0763-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW (FIRE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 19.10 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 10001353812030-9778-7 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 1000135381 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 24,589.95 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST / METER 102042-9221-3 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST / METER 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 67.01 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA2044-6743-5 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 48.03 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE W /2205-4758-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE W / 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 58.10 Total :26,553.53 217491 12/3/2015 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 2015-2927 INV 2015-2927 EDMONDS PD INMATE MEDICAL INMATE MEDICAL CARE 08/15 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 882.00 INMATE PHARMACEUTICALS 10/15 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 742.31 EDMONDS PD - CREDIT FOR INMATE PHARMACEU2015-2927 CREDIT 34Page: Packet Page 91 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217491 12/3/2015 (Continued)063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE CREDIT FOR INMATE PHARMACEUTICALS FOR 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 -108.61 Total :1,515.70 217492 12/3/2015 075495 SOFTWARE ONE US-PSI-434237 Microsoft Office Pro Plus Platform, Microsoft Office Pro Plus Platform, 001.000.31.518.88.49.00 15,194.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.49.00 1,443.43 Total :16,637.43 217493 12/3/2015 075009 SOUNDVIEW DESIGN STUDIO 00010402 WINTER 2016 CRAZE DESIGN WINTER 2016 CRAZE DESIGN 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 1,278.50 Total :1,278.50 217494 12/3/2015 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S101448440.001 City Hall - Supplies City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 70.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.68 Total :77.01 217495 12/3/2015 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 1977 SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES FOR NOVEMBER Social media services for November 2015 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.00 Total :300.00 217496 12/3/2015 073970 TALLMAN, TYLER 11/3-11/24 GYM ATTEN 11/3-11/24/15 PICKLEBALL GYM ATTENDANT 11/3-11/24/15 PICKLEBALL GYM ATTENDANT 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 30.00 Total :30.00 217497 12/3/2015 075491 TAYLOR'S EXCAVATORS INC E3DB.Pmt 2 E3DB.PMT 2 THRU 11/06/15 E3DB.Pmt 2 thru 11/06/15 112.200.68.595.33.65.00 250,859.26 35Page: Packet Page 92 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217497 12/3/2015 (Continued)075491 TAYLOR'S EXCAVATORS INC E3DB.Ret 2 112.200.223.400 -12,542.96 Total :238,316.30 217498 12/3/2015 071666 TETRA TECH INC 50985900 E4GC.SERVICES THRU 10/23/15 E4GC.Services thru 10/23/15 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 8,441.12 Total :8,441.12 217499 12/3/2015 066628 THE SUPPLY COMPANY LLC 0021333S Unit EQ97WR - Wax Unit EQ97WR - Wax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 87.01 Freight 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 3.33 Total :90.34 217500 12/3/2015 049500 THOMSON REUTERS - WEST 832709291 COURT RULES BOOKS COURT RULES BOOKS 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 346.58 COURTROOM HAND BOOK ON EVIDENCE832869564 COURTROOM HAND BOOK ON EVIDENCE 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 293.46 Total :640.04 217501 12/3/2015 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 3002221988 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER 220 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 265.61 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 25.23 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUM3002222442 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUM 118 5TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 346.04 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 32.87 Total :669.75 36Page: Packet Page 93 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217502 12/3/2015 070744 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC 2015-145874 BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AD SEA BUS MAG DECE Business recruitment ad in Seattle 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 2,200.00 Total :2,200.00 217503 12/3/2015 075154 WALTER E NELSON CO 522876 Fac Maint - Floor Pads, Liners, Vac Fac Maint - Floor Pads, Liners, Vac 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 692.86 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 65.82 Fac Maint - Fresh Scent Spray522880 Fac Maint - Fresh Scent Spray 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 48.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.60 Total :811.69 217504 12/3/2015 045912 WASPC 2015-00828 INV 2015-00828 EDMONDS PD - DON ANDERSON ASSOCIATE DUES - ANDERSON 001.000.41.521.10.49.00 75.00 Total :75.00 217505 12/3/2015 075283 WAVE BROADBAND 102-261607 FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SERVICE High Speed Internet service 12/01/15 - 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 816.00 Total :816.00 217506 12/3/2015 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 6870 BUSINESS CARDS PUB. WORKS/ DEV. SERV/ WW JIM WAITE & ROYCE NAPOLITINO - BUSINESS 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 23.38 JIM WAITE & ROYCE NAPOLITINO - BUSINESS 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 23.38 DANIEL KORSTAD - BUSINESS CARDS 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 29.38 PATRICK LAWLER, JENNIFER MACHUGA, DEE 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 98.90 37Page: Packet Page 94 of 229 12/03/2015 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 9:49:47AM Page:vchlist Bank code :usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 217506 12/3/2015 (Continued)073552 WELCO SALES LLC 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 2.22 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 2.22 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 2.79 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 9.40 Total :191.67 217507 12/3/2015 066678 WSDA PESTICIDE MGMT DIVISION 77736 DILL PESTICIDE 77736 DILL PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEWAL 77736 DILL PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEWAL 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 33.00 Total :33.00 217508 12/3/2015 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 1051 NOV-15 RETAINER Monthly Retainer 001.000.36.515.33.41.00 13,930.96 Total :13,930.96 Bank total :547,158.83114 Vouchers for bank code :usbank 547,158.83Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report114 38Page: Packet Page 95 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STM 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)c424 E3DC STM 190th Pl SW Wall Construction c428 E3FF STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2014 Waterline Replacement Program c422 E4JA STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA STR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 96 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)c423 E3DB STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP)c390 E2GB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)c482 E5JB STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 97 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 E3LA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)c405 E2AD STR Interurban Trail c146 E2DB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003)c141 E3JB STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC STR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA STR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA STR SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing c454 E4DB General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 98 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number UTILITIES Standard Details Updates s010 E5NA STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E9FB STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 99 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title STM E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement SWR E1GA c347 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update WtR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project STR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program STR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair STR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project STR E2DB c146 Interurban Trail STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 100 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) STR E3AA c420 School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STR E3DA c421 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STM E3FA c406 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM E3FB c407 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive STM E3FF c428 190th Pl SW Wall Construction STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) FAC E3LA c393 Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 101 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring WTR E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road STM E7FG m013 NPDES PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 102 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 103 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements STR E2DB c146 Interurban Trail General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project STM E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs WtR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment SWR E1GA c347 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 104 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program STR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project FAC E3LA c393 Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project STR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM E3FA c406 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM E3FB c407 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STR E3AA c420 School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant STR E3DA c421 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 105 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title WTR E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STM E3FF c428 190th Pl SW Wall Construction STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program WTR E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 106 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM E7FG m013 NPDES UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 107 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 E3LA FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA STM 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA STM 190th Pl SW Wall Construction c428 E3FF STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 108 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E9FB STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)c424 E3DC STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB STR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)c423 E3DB STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)c405 E2AD STR Interurban Trail c146 E2DB Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 109 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 110 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB STR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB STR SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing c454 E4DB STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP)c390 E2GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB UTILITIES Standard Details Updates s010 E5NA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA WtR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2014 Waterline Replacement Program c422 E4JA WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 111 of 229 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)c482 E5JB WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003)c141 E3JB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 12/3/2015 Packet Page 112 of 229 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 807 (12/01/2015 to 12/01/2015) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description CLOTHING ALLOWANCEMISCELLANEOUS903 0.00 87.51 Total Net Pay:$80.81 $87.51 0.00 12/03/2015 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page 113 of 229 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 761 (11/16/2015 to 11/30/2015) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description Educational Pay CorrectionREGULAR HOURS-ed2 0.00 -156.28 SICK LEAVE - L & ISICK120 71.00 2,121.12 SICK LEAVESICK121 686.00 24,657.70 VACATIONVACATION122 1,366.61 47,985.28 HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY123 165.50 5,717.01 FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY124 51.00 1,548.79 COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS125 340.00 11,777.62 Police Sick Leave L & ISICK129 12.00 513.15 Holiday Compensation UsedCOMP HOURS130 28.00 916.83 BEREAVEMENTBEREAVEMENT141 27.00 806.60 Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS150 117.25 4,180.56 COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS155 102.25 4,458.26 MANAGEMENT LEAVEVACATION160 36.00 1,891.76 COUNCIL BASE PAYREGULAR HOURS170 700.00 7,000.00 COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAYREGULAR HOURS174 0.00 200.00 COUNCIL PAY FOR NO MEDICALREGULAR HOURS175 0.00 1,389.86 REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS190 13,050.02 468,479.51 FIRE PENSION PAYMENTSREGULAR HOURS191 4.00 2,150.85 ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVEREGULAR HOURS195 88.00 3,341.50 OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS210 169.50 6,791.70 WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS215 49.00 2,373.75 STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS216 42.50 3,824.64 OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS220 313.25 19,268.35 OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS225 28.00 1,790.33 WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS410 0.00 214.37 SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL411 0.00 642.20 ACCRUED COMPCOMP HOURS602 85.75 0.00 Holiday Comp 1.0COMP HOURS603 27.00 0.00 ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS604 126.34 0.00 ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS606 3.00 0.00 Holiday Compensatory Time 1.5COMP HOURS607 9.00 0.00 ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUSacc 0.00 24.70 ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUSacs 0.00 169.99 BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUSboc 0.00 82.79 12/03/2015 Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 114 of 229 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 761 (11/16/2015 to 11/30/2015) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description Collision ReconstructionistMISCELLANEOUScolre 0.00 105.27 TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUScpl 0.00 143.68 CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUScrt 0.00 609.54 DETECTIVE PAYMISCELLANEOUSdet 0.00 100.25 Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUSdet4 0.00 962.34 EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAYed1 0.00 713.39 EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAYed2 0.00 852.06 EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAYed3 0.00 4,440.51 FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKfmls 14.00 561.36 HOLIDAYHOLIDAYhol 2,467.60 87,976.95 K-9 PAYMISCELLANEOUSk9 0.00 100.25 LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITYlg1 0.00 1,072.30 LONGEVITY 5.5%LONGEVITYlg10 0.00 543.60 LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%LONGEVITYlg11 0.00 858.80 LONGEVITY PAY 4%LONGEVITY PAYlg2 0.00 829.20 LONGEVITY 6%LONGEVITY PAYlg3 0.00 5,082.30 Longevity 1%LONGEVITYlg4 0.00 202.00 Longevity .5%LONGEVITYlg6 0.00 256.40 Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg7 0.00 965.62 Medical Leave Kelly DayKELLY DAYmelk 60.00 1,620.00 Medical Leave SickSICKmels 67.94 1,695.40 MOTORCYCLE PAYMISCELLANEOUSmtc 0.00 191.24 Public Disclosure SpecialistMISCELLANEOUSpds 0.00 46.65 PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUSphy 0.00 1,683.70 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SERGEANMISCELLANEOUSprof 0.00 153.70 SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5%MISCELLANEOUSsdp 0.00 504.43 ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANTMISCELLANEOUSsgt 0.00 150.88 TRAFFICMISCELLANEOUStraf 0.00 315.78 Total Net Pay:$495,244.13 $736,900.54 20,307.51 12/03/2015 Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 115 of 229 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 761 - 11/16/2015 to 11/30/2015 Bank: usbank - US Bank Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 61986 12/04/2015 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 1,173.00 0.00 61987 12/04/2015 epoa4 EPOA-4 POLICE SUPPORT 117.00 0.00 61988 12/04/2015 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 1,028.10 0.00 61989 12/04/2015 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 863.00 0.00 61990 12/04/2015 cope SEIU COPE 52.00 0.00 61991 12/04/2015 seiu SEIU LOCAL 925 3,739.13 0.00 61992 12/04/2015 uw UNITED WAY OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 724.00 0.00 61993 12/04/2015 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 2,337.51 0.00 10,033.74 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 2311 12/04/2015 pens DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 262,712.89 0.00 2313 12/04/2015 aflac AFLAC 5,210.24 0.00 2317 12/04/2015 us US BANK 131,293.91 0.00 2318 12/04/2015 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 110,992.25 0.00 2321 12/04/2015 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 20,764.00 0.00 2323 12/04/2015 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 5,032.60 0.00 2324 12/04/2015 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 48.50 0.00 536,054.39 0.00 546,088.13 0.00Grand Totals: Page 1 of 112/3/2015 Packet Page 116 of 229    AM-8173     3. C.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Linda Hynd Department:City Clerk's Office Type: Action  Information Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from William Martenson ($1,000.00) Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action  N/A Narrative William Martenson 8901 217th Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026 ($1,000.00) Attachments Martenson Claim for Damages Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 12/03/2015 10:24 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/03/2015 10:47 AM Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 12/03/2015 09:27 AM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 117 of 229 Packet Page 118 of 229 Packet Page 119 of 229 Packet Page 120 of 229 Packet Page 121 of 229 Packet Page 122 of 229 Packet Page 123 of 229 Packet Page 124 of 229 Packet Page 125 of 229 Packet Page 126 of 229    AM-8169     5. A.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:60 Minutes   Submitted For:Shane Hope, Director Submitted By:Shane Hope Department:Development Services Type: Potential Action  Information Subject Title Public Hearing* and Potential Action on Ordinance Banning Installation of Crumb Rubber on Publicly Owned Athletic Fields within City Limits for One Year *Public comments will be limited to 2-minutes per person Recommendation Previous Council Action On December 1, 2015, the City Council discussed options for addressing future crumb rubber uses and directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for a one-year ban. Narrative Over this last year, the City Council has received input and information from a variety of citizens and other entities about the safety of turf products containing crumb rubber infill and about options for other types of sports field surfaces.  Opinions have been expressed on many aspects of this subject. After further discussion at meetings on November 10 and December 1, the City Council directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to ban crumb rubber material from being installed at publicly-owned playfields.  Such fields include not only the City's fields but those of other public entities, notably the Edmonds School District.  During the period the ban is in place, the City would gather, organize, and review scientific studies and any other relevant analysis regarding the health and environmental risks association with crumb rubber.  (See attached draft Ordinance.) As proposed, the crumb rubber ban would last for one year while additional analysis is conducted; the ban could be extended, changed, or lifted, prior to its expiration.  The ban would not affect the existing use of crumb rubber in sports fields. At the public hearing, testimony will be received.  After the hearing closes, the City Council may take action on the proposed Ordinance.  Action could include revising some part of the Ordinance and/or voting to adopt it. Attachments Draft Ordinance Packet Page 127 of 229 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Scott Passey 12/04/2015 07:48 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/04/2015 08:26 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/04/2015 08:28 AM Form Started By: Shane Hope Started On: 12/03/2015 08:12 AM Final Approval Date: 12/04/2015  Packet Page 128 of 229 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROHIBITING FOR ONE YEAR THE INSTALLATION OF STYRENE-BUTADIENE RUBBER (ALSO KNOWN AS SBR OR “CRUMB RUBBER”) ON PUBLICLY-OWNED ATHLETIC FIELDS WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS; AND DIRECTING THAT ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS BE CONDUCTED ON THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS FROM SUCH INSTALLATIONS OF SBR UPON HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT. WHEREAS, the precautionary principle is a doctrine stating that when there are threats of serious or irreversible damage to the environment, a lack of full scientific certainty is not a reason for postponing measures to prevent the damage; and WHEREAS, the precautionary principle can be applied with equal force to threats of serious damage to human health; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council supports the values embodied in the precautionary principle; and WHEREAS, concerns have been raised about possible environmental and human health effects of SBR athletic fields; and WHEREAS, a recent study conducted at Yale University found that the rubber used in synthetic turf and rubber mulch contained 96 chemicals; and WHEREAS, there were no toxicity assessments for a little under half of those chemicals and, of those with toxicity assessments, 20 percent were probable carcinogens; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council would like to know whether these chemicals may have synergistic effects and are present in levels that pose a health risk; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Health is working with the University of Washington’s School of Public Health to review information provided by soccer coach Amy Griffin and verify that information against the Washington State Cancer Registry in hopes of determining whether there is an increased rate of selected cancers among soccer players, especially goalies compared to what it would expect based on Washington state rates; and Packet Page 129 of 229 WHEREAS, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commision (CPSC) is working closely with its federal and state partners toward ending the uncertainty surrounding crumb rubber; and WHEREAS, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment is planning to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of crumb rubber; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council is hopeful that, in the near future, this evaluation and other studies will be conducted into human exposure and the impact on human health from crumb rubber; and WHEREAS, City staff should monitor the status of these crumb rubber studies; and WHEREAS, during this period of uncertainty, the Edmonds City Council is mindful that alternatives to SBR playfields exist that do not present as many health concerns as SBR; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to Section 2 of this ordinance: A. SBR. “SBR” is an athletic field infill material consisting recycled tires consisting of styrene-butadiene rubber. It is commonly known as “crumb rubber.” B. Publicly-owned athletic fields. A “publicly-owned athletic field” is an athletic field owned by a city, county, school district, port district, hospital district, other special purpose district or government entity. Section 2. SBR Prohibition. For as long as this ordinance remains in effect, it shall be unlawful to: A. Install SBR on publicly-owned athletic fields already existing within the City of Edmonds if those fields have not already been converted to an SBR infill; B. Install SBR on new public-owned athletic fields within the City of Edmonds. Packet Page 130 of 229 Section 3. Additional Analysis. To determine whether the duration of the above prohibition should be extended, the city council directs that the following additional analysis occur during 2016: A. Monitor the status of ongoing and new research into the health effects of SBR; B. Engage an independent consultant with appropriate expertise to review the research that has been completed; C. Provide a report to the city council sometime in 2016 that will allow for the risks associated with crumb rubber to be reassessed based on the latest authoritative information. Section 4. Sunset. Unless the effective duration of this ordinance is extended by a subsequently adopted ordinance, the provisions of this ordinance shall be null, void, and of no force and effect on or after January 11, 2017. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY Packet Page 131 of 229 JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 132 of 229 5 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2015, 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, PROHIBITING FOR ONE YEAR THE INSTALLATION OF STYRENE-BUTADIENE RUBBER (ALSO KNOWN AS SBR OR “CRUMB RUBBER”) ON PUBLICLY-OWNED ATHLETIC FIELDS WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS; AND DIRECTING THAT ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS BE CONDUCTED ON THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS FROM SUCH INSTALLATIONS OF SBR UPON HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT. . The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2015. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 Packet Page 133 of 229    AM-8175     6. A.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:60 Minutes   Submitted For:Scott James Submitted By:Scott James Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Continued Deliberations and Adoption of 2016 Budget, including the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation There is one recommendation for Council. The recommendation is for Council to make a motion to approve ordinance XXXX adopting the 2016 Budget as amended and adopting amendments to the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Previous Council Action Mayor Earling presented the Proposed 2016 Budget to City Council during their October 13th City Council meeting. On October 20th, the Police Department, City Clerk, Mayor's Office, Council, Finance & Information Services and the Nondepartmental departments presented their 2016 budget requests. On October 27th, the Economic Development/Community Services, Development Services, Parks departments, Human Resources and Municipal Court presented their 2016 budget requests to Council. On November 2nd, the Public Works department present their 2016 budget requests to Council. On November 10th, staff provided Council a presentation of 2016 revenue sources. The remaining time for this agenda item was for Public Comment and for Council to begin their discussion of the 2016 Budget. The scheduled November 17th Public Hearing and Potential adoption of the 2016 Budget was cancelled due to weather. On November 24th, 2015, Council will held a Public Hearing on the 2016 Budget and Revenue Sources. On December 1st, Council will held a Public Hearing on the 2016 Budget. Amendments to the Capital Facilities Plan: On September 22, 2015, City Council began the review of  the proposed 2016-2021 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program amendments. TheCapital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program were presented at Public Hearing held Packet Page 134 of 229 before the Planning Board on October 14, 2015. On October 27, 2015, a Council Public Hearing on the Capital Facilities Plan Update for 2016-2021 to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program was held, and on November 24, 2015, City Council discussed the Capital Facilities Plan Update for 2016-2021 to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program. Narrative On December 8th, 2015, Council will discussion of the 2016 Budget and Approve an Ordinance Adopting the 2016 Budget and Adopting Amendments to the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan.  As part of the discussion,  Council will be asked to decide on whether the proposed amendments from Staff and Council should be added to the Budget.  Attachments Proposed Changes to the Budget Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Scott James 12/03/2015 12:52 PM City Clerk Scott Passey 12/03/2015 01:31 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/03/2015 03:13 PM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/03/2015 03:27 PM Form Started By: Scott James Started On: 12/03/2015 11:25 AM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 135 of 229 Staff Recommended Changes to the Budget 1 Item # Budget Book Page #Description Cash Increase (Decrease) 1 57 Student's Saving Salmon Club for Stream Testing ($5,000) 2 57 Reduce PFD Contingency Reserve to $135,000 from $180,000 $45,000 3 Decision Package 9 Increase Funding for Prosecutor Contract ($12,000) 4 57 Include "On-going" Transfer to Sister City Fund 138 ($5,000) Impacts to General Fund Ending Cash $23,000 5 163 Reduce Stormwater Funding ($187,500) Impacts to Fund 112 Ending Cash ($187,500) 5 149 Increase Stormwater Funding $187,500 Impacts to Fund 421 Ending Cash $187,500 STAFF'S RECOMMENDED PRELIMINARY BUDGET BOOK CHANGES GENERAL FUND Fund 112 Street Construction Fund 421 Water Utility Fund Packet Page 136 of 229 Council Requested Changes to the Budget 2 Item # Budget Book Page #Description Cash Increase (Decrease)Submitter 1 Decision Package 1 Council Legislative Assistant (move expense from salaries and benefits to professional services)$0 Buckshnis 2 33 Increase Council Contingency Funding by $10,000 ($10,000) Buckshnis 3 33 Reduce Council Travel Budget by $2,500 $2,500 Bloom 4 33 Reduce Council Training Budget by $2,250 $2,250 Bloom 5 New Item Add Tree Board Funding for Staff Support and Supplies ($9,000) Bloom 6 Decision Package 1 Remove the Council Legislative Assistant from the Budget $42,160 Petso 7 Decision Package 11 Remove the Staff Accountant Position from the Budget $67,020 Petso 8 Decision Package 21 Move Expense for the Downtown Restroom contribution from REET 1 Fund 126 to the General Fund ($90,000) Petso 9 Decision Package 27 Remove Community Relations Consultant from the Budget $30,000 Petso 10 Decision Package 30 Remove Increase to Annual Business-Atrraction Advertising Expense from the Budget $26,000 Petso 11 Decision Package 35 Remove Permit Coordinator Position from the Budget $25,720 Petso 12 Decision Package 36 Remove Advance Planner Position from the Budget $38,530 Petso 13 Decision Package 42 Move Expense of Purchase of John Deere Gator Utility Tractor to Equipment Rental Fund $14,400 Petso 14 Decision Package 44 Remove Construction Inspector Position from the Budget $11,380 Petso 15 171 Move Trackside Warning System Project to the General Fund ($300,000) Petso 18 Decision Package 29 Remove Expense for Community Survey from the Budget $19,000 Bloom Impacts to General Fund Ending Cash ($130,040) GENERAL FUND COUNCIL'S REQUESTED PRELIMINARY BUDGET BOOK CHANGES Packet Page 137 of 229 Council Requested Changes to the Budget 3 Item # Budget Book Page #Description Cash Increase (Decrease)Submitter 8 Decision Package 21 Move Expense for the Downtown Restroom contribution from REET 1 Fund 126 to the General Fund $90,000 Petso 15 171 Move Trackside Warning System Project to the General Fund $300,000 Petso 16 171 Move $100,000 of Annual Street Preservation Expense to the REET 2 Fund 125 $100,000 Petso Impacts to Fund 126 Ending Cash $490,000 16 171 Move $100,000 of Annual Street Preservation Expense from the REET 1 Fund 126 ($100,000) Petso Impacts to Fund 125 Ending Cash ($100,000) 7 Decision Package 11 Remove the Staff Accountant Position from the Budget $13,300 Petso 11 Decision Package 35 Remove Permit Coordinator Position from the Budget $2,720 Petso 14 Decision Package 44 Remove Construction Inspector Position from the Budget $34,140 Petso 17 Decision Package 59 Remove Water Dept. Position from the Budget $67,080 Bloom Impacts to Fund 421 Ending Cash $117,240 7 Decision Package 11 Remove the Staff Accountant Position from the Budget $7,390 Petso 11 Decision Package 35 Remove Permit Coordinator Position from the Budget $2,720 Petso 14 Decision Package 44 Remove Construction Inspector Position from the Budget $34,140 Petso 18 Decision Package 44 Replace the Stormwater Employee ($60,880) with Contract Position $0 Bloom Impacts to Fund 422 Ending Cash $44,250 7 Decision Package 11 Remove the Staff Accountant Position from the Budget $16,240 Petso 11 Decision Package 35 Remove Permit Coordinator Position from the Budget $2,720 Petso 14 Decision Package 44 Remove Construction Inspector Position from the Budget $34,140 Petso Impacts to Fund 423 Ending Cash $53,100 Item # Budget Book Page #Description Cash Increase (Decrease)Submitter 13 Decision Package 42 Move Expense of Purchase of John Deere Gator Utility Tractor to Equipment Rental Fund ($14,400) Petso Impacts to Fund 511 Ending Cash ($14,400) Fund 511 Equipment Rental Fund Fund 423 Sewer Fund Fund 126 REET 1 Fund 125 REET 2 Fund 421 Water Utility Fund Fund 422 Storm Utility Fund COUNCIL'S REQUESTED PRELIMINARY BUDGET BOOK CHANGES Packet Page 138 of 229    AM-8177     6. B.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Rob English Submitted By:Robert English Department:Engineering Type: Action  Information Subject Title Continued Deliberations and Adoption of the Proposed Capital Improvement Program. Recommendation Approve the 2016-2021 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Previous Council Action On September 22, 2015, Council reviewed the Draft Capital Improvement Program.  On October 27, 2015, a public hearing was held to receive public comment. On November 24, 2015, Council discussed the Capital Improvement Program. On December 1, 2015, Council discussed the Capital Improvement Program. Narrative The proposed 2016-2021 CIP is attached as Exhibit 1.  The CIP identifies both capital improvement and preservation projects for the next six years along with estimated project expenditures and funding.    The CIP has two sections related to general and parks projects and each project list is organized by the City's financial fund numbers. Exhibit 3 is a comparison that shows added, deleted and changed projects between last year's CIP to the proposed CIP. Staff recommends approval of the 2016-2021 CIP.  Attachments Exhibit 1 - CIP 2016-2021 Exhibit 2 - CFP/CIP Comparison (2016-2021) Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator)Megan Luttrell 12/03/2015 02:39 PM Public Works Phil Williams 12/03/2015 02:47 PM City Clerk Scott Passey 12/03/2015 02:55 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/03/2015 03:13 PM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/03/2015 03:27 PM Packet Page 139 of 229 Form Started By: Robert English Started On: 12/03/2015 01:28 PM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 140 of 229 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2016-2021 DRAFT 1 Packet Page 141 of 229 2 Packet Page 142 of 229 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2016-2021) Table of Contents FUND DESCRIPTION DEPARTMENT PAGE GENERAL 112 Transportation Public Works 7 113 Multimodal Transportation Community Services 10 116 Building Maintenance Public Works 11 125 Capital Projects Fund Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 13 126 Special Capital / Parks Acquisition Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 15 129 Special Projects Parks & Recreation 16 132 Parks Construction (Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 17 421 Water Projects Public Works 19 422 Storm Projects Public Works 20 423 Sewer Projects Public Works 22 423.76 Waste Water Treatment Plant Public Works 24 PARKS – PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS 125 Capital Projects Fund Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 27 126 Special Capital / Parks Acquisition Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 58 132 Parks Construction (Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 61 3 Packet Page 143 of 229 4 Packet Page 144 of 229 CIP GENERAL 5 Packet Page 145 of 229 6 Packet Page 146 of 229 Capital Improvements Program Fund 112 - Transportation Projects PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Preservation / Maintenance Projects Annual Street Preservation Program (Overlays, Chip Seals, Etc.)$1,336,357 $1,137,643 $2,180,000 $1,420,000 $2,900,000 $2,060,000 $3,120,000 $12,817,643 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th Ave W to 84th Ave W $1,010,000 $30,000 $30,000 Citywide - Signal Improvements $325,000 $325,000 $650,000 Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades $75,000 $425,000 $500,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave @ 238th St. SW $750,000 $750,000 Main St. @ 3rd Signal Upgrades $75,000 $300,000 $375,000 Safety / Capacity Analysis 212th St. SW / 84th Ave (Five Corners) Roundabout X $141,226 $10,000 $10,000 228th St. SW Corridor Safety Improvements X $5,569,928 $447,077 $447,077 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th Pl. W X $100,000 $100,000 76th Ave W @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements X $484,223 $4,974,232 $4,974,232 SR-99 Gateway / Revitalization X $500,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements X $193,000 $175,000 $535,000 $903,000 Main St. @ 9th Ave. X $135,000 $776,000 $911,000 76th Ave. W @ 220th St SW - Intersection Improvements X $236,000 $1,127,000 $2,951,000 $4,314,000 Arterial Street Signal Coordination Improvements $50,000 $50,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $175,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 $2,806,000 Hwy. 99 @ 216th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $164,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 $2,335,000 Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $175,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 $3,215,000 SR-104 @ 226th St. SW / 15th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $30,000 $164,000 $194,000 SR-104 @ 95th Pl. W Intersection Improvements X $75,000 $420,000 $495,000 SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $200,000 $1,138,000 $1,338,000 Citywide Protective / Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion $20,000 $20,000 Type 2 Raised Pavement Markers $100,000 $100,000 Non-motorized transportation projects Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St. to Caspers St.X $5,198 $10,000 $177,000 $2,162,000 $2,349,000 Dayton St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave. S Walkway X $75,000 $75,000 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. to SR-104 X $200,000 $1,105,000 $1,305,000 238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W X $1,523,135 $148,135 $148,135 236th St. SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary X $71,002 $593,465 $593,465 236th St. SW from SR-104 to 97th Ave. W X $213,000 $1,182,000 $1,395,000 84th Ave. W from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW X $90,000 $90,000 80th Ave. W from 206th St. SW to 212th St. SW X $60,000 $74,000 $766,000 $900,000 2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St. Walkway X $30,000 $30,000 Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW Walkway X $340,000 $1,768,000 $2,108,000 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W X $200,000 $1,015,000 $1,215,000 Walnut St. from 3rd Ave. to 4th Ave. Walkway X $105,000 $105,000 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W X $157,000 $157,000 238th St. SW from SR-104 to Hwy. 99 X $491,000 $491,000 ADA Curb Ramps Improvements $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,575,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $25,000 $25,000 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave S X $30,693 $0 Hwy 99 Enhancement (Phase 3) $585,321 $41,000 $41,000 Minor Sidewalk Program X $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000 ADA Curb Ramps along 3rd Ave S from Main St to Pine St $70,108 $0 Verdant Citywide Bicycle Improvements $109,785 $626,840 $626,840 Traffic Calming Projects Traffic Calming Program / non-motorized transportation safety $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $120,000 Ferry Projects Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St.X $357,000 $357,000 Projects for 2016-2021 7 P a c k e t P a g e 1 4 7 o f 2 2 9 Traffic Planning Projects Transportation Plan Update $107,194 $0 SR104 Transportation Corridor Study $95,026 $0 Citywide ADA Transition Plan $110,000 $110,000 Trackside Warning Sys or Quiet Zone @ Dayton/Main St. RR Crossings X $50,000 $300,000 $300,000 Total Projects $11,209,196 $8,543,392 $2,452,000 $1,515,000 $10,328,000 $16,261,000 $22,652,000 $61,751,392 Debt Service Debt Service on Loan (1) 220th St Design $18,869 $18,778 $18,687 $18,596 $19,506 $18,415 $18,325 Debt Service on Loan (2) 220th St Construction $22,235 $22,129 $22,023 $21,917 $21,811 $21,706 $21,494 Debt Service on Loan (3) 100th Ave Road Stabilization $34,854 $34,690 $34,525 $34,361 $34,196 $34,032 $33,868 Total Debt $75,958 $75,597 $75,235 $74,874 $75,513 $74,153 $73,687 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance $209,915 $191,938 $208,800 $297,565 $572,691 $654,478 $408,325 Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax $140,000 $140,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 Annual Street Preservation Program $654,357 $257,643 $150,000 $150,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 Annual Street Preservation Program $12,000 $880,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 Contribution - General Fund for Annual Street Preservation Program $670,000 $0 $650,000 $820,000 $1,100,000 $1,160,000 $1,220,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th to 84th $252,500 $7,500 Reimbursement - Fund 421 for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvement $106,730 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvement $68,500 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvement $177,254 Reimbursement - Mountlake Terrace for 228th St. SW Improvements (Overlay)$386,433 $31,823 Reimbursement - Fund 421 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $70,000 $580,000 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $15,000 $330,755 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $70,000 $700,000 Reimbursement - Fund 421 for Sunset Ave. Walkway $75,000 $575,000 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for Sunset Ave. Walkway $50,000 $150,000 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 238th St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W $957,610 $81,283 Reimbursement - PSE for 238th St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W $55,159 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 236th St. SW Walkway from SR-104 to Madrona School $202,109 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Minor Sidewalk Program $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 - Hwy 99 Lighting (Phase 3)$30,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Traffic Calming Program $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Contribution - General Fund for SR-104 Transportation Corridor Study $95,026 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Citywide ADA Transition Plan $110,000 Contribution - General Fund for Trackside Warning System or Quiet Zone $50,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 Trackside Warning System $300,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Protective/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion $20,000 Reimbursement - Fund 422 (STORMWATER)$50,258 $109,000 $116,000 $120,000 $125,000 $130,000 $135,000 Traffic Impact Fees $82,982 $125,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Total Revenues $4,123,724 $4,192,051 $2,024,800 $2,162,565 $3,972,691 $3,394,478 $3,213,325 8 P a c k e t P a g e 1 4 8 o f 2 2 9 Grants 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (Federal) for 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th Ave to 84th Ave $757,445 $22,500 (Federal) for 212th @ 84th (Five Corners) Roundabout $122,160 $8,650 (Federal) for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements $3,435,343 $277,947 (State) for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements $1,379,576 $119,927 (Federal) for 76th Ave W @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $283,674 $3,134,914 (Federal) Sunset Ave. Walkway from Bell St. to Caspers St.$4,496 $8,650 (State) 238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W $503,765 $34,954 (State) 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave S $30,693 (Federal) 236th St. SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary $71,002 $391,356 (Federal) Hwy 99 Enhancement (Phase 3)$585,321 $10,000 (Federal) ADA Curb Ramps along 3rd Ave. S from Main St. to Pine St.$70,108 (Verdant) for Verdant Citywide Bicycle Improvements $109,785 $626,840 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured $7,353,368 $4,635,738 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Grants 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Grants/ Loans Sought / Funding (not Secured) Annual Street Preservation Program (Overlays, Chip Seals, Etc)$800,000 $900,000 $1,000,000 Citywide Safety Improvements - Signal Cabinet $325,000 $325,000 Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades $75,000 $425,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave W @ 238th St SW $750,000 Main St @ 3rd Ave Signal Upgrades $37,500 $250,000 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th Pl. W $50,000 SR-99 Gateway / Revitalization $500,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 196th St SW @ 88th Ave W - Intersection Improvements $122,000 $87,500 $535,000 Main @ 9th Ave. Intersection Improvements $118,000 $776,000 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements $206,000 $1,127,000 $2,951,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $152,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 Hwy 99 @ 216th St. SW Intersection Improvements $142,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 Hwy 99 @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements $152,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 SR-104 @ 226th / 15th Intersection Improvements $15,000 $164,000 SR-104 @ 95th Pl. W Intersection Improvements $65,000 $420,000 SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements $173,000 $1,138,000 Type 2 Raised Pavement Markers $100,000 Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St to Caspers St $1,870,000 Dayton St. Walkway from 7th to 8th Ave.$37,500 232nd St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. to SR-104 $100,000 $1,105,000 236th St. SW Walkway from SR-104 to 97th Pl. W $106,500 $1,182,000 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th to 234th $90,000 80th Ave. W Walkway from 206th to 212nd $30,000 $37,000 $766,000 Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th $170,000 $1,768,000 218th St. SW Walkway from 76th to 84th $100,000 $878,000 Walnut St. Walkway from 3rd to 4th $105,000 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 72nd Ave W $137,000 238th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to SR-104 $372,300 ADA Curb Ramps Improvements $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $25,000 Ferry Storage Improvements $357,000 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Sought / Funding (not secured) $0 $0 $800,000 $0 $7,085,300 $13,349,000 $19,975,000 Grant / Not Secured Funding Subtotal $7,353,368 $4,635,738 $800,000 $0 $7,085,300 $13,349,000 $19,975,000 Total Revenues & Grants $11,477,092 $8,827,789 $2,824,800 $2,162,565 $11,057,991 $16,743,478 $23,188,325 Total Projects ($11,209,196)($8,543,392)($2,452,000)($1,515,000)($10,328,000)($16,261,000)($22,652,000) Total Debt ($75,958)($75,597)($75,235)($74,874)($75,513)($74,153)($73,687) Ending Cash Balance $191,938 $208,800 $297,565 $572,691 $654,478 $408,325 $462,638 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 4 9 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 113 - Multimodal Transportation PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Edmonds Crossing WSDOT Ferry/Multimodal Facility X Unknown Total Project $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 State Transportation Appropriations Federal Funding (Unsecured) Interest Earnings Total Revenues $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 Total Revenue $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 Total Project $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ending Cash Balance $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 $55,859 Projects for 2016-2021 1 0 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 0 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 116 - Building Maintenance PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) ADA Improvements- City Wide $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 Anderson Center Accessibility $50,000 $50,000 Anderson Center Interior Painting $20,000 $30,000 $50,000 Anderson Center Exterior Painting $30,000 $30,000 Anderson Center Radiator Replacement $25,000 $85,000 $110,000 Anderson Center Exterior Repairs $75,000 $75,000 Anderson Center Blinds $5,000 $5,000 Anderson Center Asbestos Abatement $75,000 $75,000 Anderson Center Flooring/Gym $15,000 $25,000 $25,000 $65,000 Anderson Center Countertop Replacement $10,000 $10,000 Anderson Center Oil Tank Decommissioning $30,000 $30,000 Anderson Center Elevator Replacement $150,000 $150,000 Anderson Center Roof Replacement $325,000 $25,000 $350,000 Cemetery Building Gutter Replacement $0 City Hall Carpet Replacement $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 City Hall Elevator Replacement $150,000 $150,000 City Hall Exterior Cleaning and Repainting $40,000 $20,000 $60,000 City Hall Roof Repairs $0 City Hall HVAC $20,000 $20,000 City Hall Security Measures $35,000 $35,000 City Park Maint. Bldg. Roof $25,000 $25,000 ESCO III Project $60,000 $0 ESCO IV Project $170,000 $0 Fishing Pier Rehab $146,400 $0 Fire Station #16 Painting $5,000 $5,000 Fire Station #16 Carpet $20,000 $10,000 $30,000 Fire Station #16 HVAC Replacement $30,000 $30,000 Fire Station #17 Carpet $12,000 $12,000 Fire Station #17 Interior Painting $15,000 $15,000 Fire Station #20 Carpet $15,000 $15,000 Fire Station #20 Interior Painting $10,000 $10,000 Fire Station #20 Stairs and Deck Replacement $40,000 $40,000 Grandstand Exterior and Roof Repairs $100,000 $100,000 Library Plaza Appliance Replacement $4,000 $4,000 Library Plaza Brick Façade Addition $21,000 $21,000 Library Wood Trim $5,000 $5,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Roof Replacement $28,000 $0 Meadowdale Flooring Replacement $25,000 $25,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Gutter Replacement $15,000 $10,000 $25,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Ext. Surface Cleaning $0 Meadowdale Clubhouse Fire Alarm Replacement $25,000 $25,000 Misc. Fire Sprinkler System Repairs $0 Misc. / Unanticipated Buliding Maintenance $30,000 $15,000 $15,000 Public Safety/Fire Station #17 Soffit Installation $4,000 $4,000 Public Safety Exterior Painting $20,000 $20,000 Public Safety Council Chamber Carpet $10,000 $10,000 Public Safety HVAC Repairs & Maintenance $0 Public Works Decant Improvements $0 Senior Center Misc Repairs & Maintenance $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $50,000 Senior Center Siding/ Sealing (CDBG)$0 Total Projects $439,400 $90,000 $564,000 $310,000 $300,000 $297,000 $290,000 $1,851,000 Projects for 2016-2021 1 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 1 o f 2 2 9 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$52,400 $36,000 $2,600 $13,600 $3,600 $3,600 $6,600 Interest Earnings $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contribution from Gen Fund #001 and other $266,600 $56,600 $575,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 Commerce Grants $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CDBG Grant (Unsecured)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WA Dept. of Ecology Grant $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WDFW Grant (Secured)$146,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WDFW Grant (Unsecured)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utility Grant Funding (Estimated)$10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WA State HCPF Grant Funding (Secured)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues $475,400 $92,600 $577,600 $313,600 $303,600 $303,600 $306,600 Total Revenue $475,400 $92,600 $577,600 $313,600 $303,600 $303,600 $306,600 Total Project ($439,400)($90,000)($564,000)($310,000)($300,000)($297,000)($290,000) Ending Cash Balance $36,000 $2,600 $13,600 $3,600 $3,600 $6,600 $16,600 1 2 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 2 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 125 - Capital Projects Fund PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Park Development Projects* Anderson Center Field / Court / Stage $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 Brackett's Landing Improvements $5,000 $50,000 $5,000 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $170,000 City Park Improvements $272,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,000 Civic Center Improvements X $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $600,000 $640,000 Sunset Avenue Walkway $100,000 $100,000 Fishing Pier & Restrooms $175,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $225,000 Former Woodway HS Improvements (with successful capital campaign)X see below $0 Maplewood Park Improvements $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 Marina Beach Park Improvements $100,000 $50,000 $350,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 $1,505,000 Mathay Ballinger Park $20,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Grounds $75,000 $5,000 $5,000 $85,000 Meadowdale Playfields $250,000 $250,000 $500,000 Pine Ridge Park Improvements $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 Seaview Park Improvements $20,000 $10,000 $5,000 $15,000 Sierra Park Improvements $70,000 $70,000 Yost Park / Pool Improvements $120,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000 Parklet development, 4th Ave cultural corridor $40,000 $40,000 $80,000 City Gateway replacements $40,000 $40,000 Outdoor Fitness Zones $50,000 $50,000 Citywide Park Improvements* Citywide Beautification $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $126,000 Misc Paving $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $40,000 Citywide Park Improvements/Misc Small Projects $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $240,000 Sports Fields Upgrade / Playground Partnership $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $75,000 Specialized Projects* Aquatic Center Facility (dependent upon successful capital campaign)X $0 Trail Development* Misc Unpaved Trail / Bike Path Improvements $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $30,000 Planning Cultural Arts Facility Needs Study X $0 Edmonds Marsh / Hatchery Improvements X $105,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 $130,000 Edmonds Cemetery Mapping Project $100,000 $100,000 Civic Center Master Plan $100,000 $100,000 Sr. Center/Waterfront walkway design $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 Pine Ridge Park Forest Management Study $50,000 $50,000 Total Project $718,000 $1,111,000 $786,000 $741,000 $716,000 $746,000 $786,000 $4,886,000 Reimbursements Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Sr. Center design)$25,000 $25,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Outdoor Fitness Zones)$50,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Dayton St Plaza) Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Fishing Pier rehab match)$100,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Former Woodway HS Improvements)X $500,000 $155,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (Pavement Preservation Program)$654,357 $257,643 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (Highway 99 Lighting Phase 3)$30,000 Total Reimbursements $1,154,357 $617,643 $175,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $0 Projects for 2016-2021 1 3 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 3 o f 2 2 9 Total Project & Reimbursements $1,872,357 $1,728,643 $961,000 $891,000 $866,000 $896,000 $786,000 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$1,531,384 $769,727 $49,084 $88,084 $197,084 $331,084 $435,084 Real Estate Tax 1/4% $1,100,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Donations Miscellaneous $10,700 $8,000 Total Revenues $2,642,084 $1,777,727 $1,049,084 $1,088,084 $1,197,084 $1,331,084 $1,435,084 Total Revenue $2,642,084 $1,777,727 $1,049,084 $1,088,084 $1,197,084 $1,331,084 $1,435,084 Total Project & Reimbursements ($1,872,357)($1,728,643)($961,000)($891,000)($866,000)($896,000)($786,000) Ending Cash Balance $769,727 $49,084 $88,084 $197,084 $331,084 $435,084 $649,084 *Projects in all categories may be eligible for 1% for art with the exception of planning projects. 1 4 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 4 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 126 - Special Capital/Parks Acquisition PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Debt Service on City Hall $0 Debt Service Marina Bch/Library Roof $84,428 $83,228 $82,028 $80,828 $79,628 $83,428 $409,140 Debt Service on PSCC Purchase $57,098 $56,198 $60,298 $54,298 $53,398 $52,498 $276,690 Debt Service on FAC Seismic retrofit $29,874 $29,957 $29,621 $29,640 $29,630 $29,981 $148,829 Estimated Debt Payment on Civic Playfield Acquisition $0 Total Debt $171,400 $169,383 $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 $0 $834,659 Project Name Acquistion of Civic Field Misc. Open Space/Land $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,200,000 Reimbursements Reimbursement to Fund 132 for Waterfront / Tidelands Acquisition $0 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,200,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Annual Street Preservation Program $264,500 $887,500 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,687,500 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Trackside Warning System $300,000 $300,000 Reimbursement to Fund 111 for Signal Cabinet Upgrades $70,000 $70,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds $25,000 $25,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for ADA Transition Plan $110,000 $110,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Traffic Calming Program $20,000 $20,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Permissive Left Turn Modifications $20,000 $20,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Minor Sidewalk Program $50,000 $50,000 Total Project & Reimbursements $664,500 $1,882,500 $850,000 $850,000 $850,000 $850,000 $400,000 $5,682,500 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$1,166,950 $1,433,050 $383,167 $363,220 $350,454 $339,798 $325,891 Real estate Tax 1/4%/1st Qtr % $1,100,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Interest Earnings $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 Total Revenues $2,268,950 $2,435,050 $1,385,167 $1,365,220 $1,352,454 $1,341,798 $1,325,891 Grants 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Grants/ Loans Sought (not Secured) Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenue & Grants & Subsidy $2,268,950 $2,435,050 $1,385,167 $1,365,220 $1,352,454 $1,341,798 $1,325,891 Total Debt ($171,400)($169,383)($171,947)($164,766)($162,656)($165,907)$0 Total Project & Reimbursements ($664,500)($1,882,500)($850,000)($850,000)($850,000)($850,000)($400,000) Ending Cash Balance $1,433,050 $383,167 $363,220 $350,454 $339,798 $325,891 $925,891 Projects for 2016-2021 1 5 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 5 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 129 - Special Projects PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) $0 Total Projects $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Balance (January 1st)$17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 Investment Interest Total Revenues $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 Grants 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Grants $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues & Grants $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 Total Construction Projects $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ending Cash Balance $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 Projects for 2016-2021 1 6 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 6 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 132 - Parks Construction PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) 4th Ave Corridor Enhancement $1,425,000 $2,900,000 $4,325,000 Cultural Heritage Tour and Way-Finding Signage $0 Dayton Street Plaza $168,000 $0 Civic Center Acquisition/Development $1,950,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Senior Center Project $25,000 $525,000 $500,000 $1,050,000 City Park Revitalization $854,900 $0 Former Woodway HS Improvements $500,000 $155,000 $155,000 Wetland Mitigation $6,343 $0 Edmonds Marsh/Daylighting Willow Creek $200,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,200,000 Fishing Pier Rehab $200,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 Public Market (Downtown Waterfront)$0 Outdoor Fitness Zones $125,000 $125,000 Veteran's Plaza $10,000 $475,000 $475,000 Total Projects $3,689,243 $1,805,000 $525,000 $1,925,000 $4,400,000 $1,500,000 $3,000,000 $13,155,000 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$788,630 $422,970 $1,235,210 $1,435,210 $1,985,210 $1,835,210 $2,035,210 Beginning Cash Balance Milltown Beginning Cash Balance Cultural Heritage Tour Park Impact Fees $136,410 $136,410 $500,000 Reimbursement from Fund 117-200 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 120 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 127-200 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 120 for Way-Finding Signage Grant Match Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Outdoor Fitness Zones $50,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Dayton St. Plaza Reimbursement from Fund 125 for City Park Revitalization Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Former Woodway HS Improvements $500,000 $155,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Senior Center Design $25,000 $25,000 Reimbursement from Fund 126 for Waterfront Acquisition/Development $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Contribution from 01 for Edmonds Marsh $200,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Marsh/Marina Beach $350,000 $500,000 $500,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Fishing Pier $100,000 Investment Interest $830 $830 Total Revenues $1,825,870 $1,290,210 $1,960,210 $1,985,210 $2,685,210 $2,535,210 $2,235,210 Projects for 2016-2021 1 7 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 7 o f 2 2 9 Grants 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Grants/ Loans (Secured) 4th Ave / Cultural Heritage Tour (Preserve America/National Park Service) Dayton Street Plaza (Arts Fest. Found./Hubbard Trust/Ed in Bloom) Interurban Trail (Federal CMAQ) Interurban Trail (State RCO) Snohomish County / City Park $80,000 RCO State grant / City Park Revitalization $500,000 Snohomish County Tourism for Way-Finding Conservation Futures/Waterfront Acquisition $500,000 Wetland Mitigation $6,343 RCO/Civic Acquisition $1,000,000 RCO/Fishing Pier $200,000 $1,200,000 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured $2,286,343 $1,200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Grants/ Loans Sought (not Secured) 4th Ave Corridor Enhancement (state, federal, other)$1,425,000 $2,900,000 Outdoor Fitness Zones $75,000 Sr. Ctr Project $500,000 Edmonds Marsh/Marina Beach $650,000 $1,000,000 Veterans Plaza $475,000 Civic Development $2,400,000 Bond funding/Civic Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Sought (not secured) $0 $550,000 $0 $1,925,000 $3,550,000 $1,000,000 $2,400,000 Grants Subtotal $2,286,343 $1,750,000 $0 $1,925,000 $3,550,000 $1,000,000 $2,400,000 Total Revenues & Cash Balances & Grants $4,112,213 $3,040,210 $1,960,210 $3,910,210 $6,235,210 $3,535,210 $4,635,210 Total Construction Projects (3,689,243)($1,805,000)(525,000)(1,925,000)($4,400,000)(1,500,000)($3,000,000) Ending Cash Balance $422,970 $1,235,210 $1,435,210 $1,985,210 $1,835,210 $2,035,210 $1,635,210 *Projects may be partially eligible for 1% for Art 1 8 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 8 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 421 - Water Projects PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) 2013 Replacement Program $0 2014 Replacement Program $603,920 $0 2014 Waterline Overlays $0 2015 Replacement Program $2,291,559 $490,000 $490,000 2015 Waterline Overlays $98,284 $0 2016 Replacement Program $304,482 $2,052,028 $2,052,028 2016 Waterline Overlays $220,000 $220,000 Dayton Ave 3rd to 9th Utility Improvements $487,500 $487,500 2017 Replacement Program $302,948 $2,678,999 $2,981,947 2018 Replacement Program $400,000 $2,786,159 $3,186,159 2019 Replacement Program $416,000 $2,897,605 $3,313,605 2020 Replacement Program $432,640 $3,013,510 $3,446,150 2021 Replacement Program $449,946 $3,134,050 $3,583,996 2022 Replacement Program $467,944 $467,944 Five Corners Reservoir Recoating $100,000 $1,850,100 $1,850,100 2016 Water System Plan Update $86,100 $116,500 $116,500 Total Projects $3,484,345 $5,519,076 $3,078,999 $3,202,159 $3,330,245 $3,463,456 $3,601,994 $22,195,929 Reimbursements & Contributions Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (228th Project)$106,730 $0 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (212th & 76th Improvements)$70,000 $580,000 $580,000 Reimbursement to Fund 117 1% Arts (2015 Watermain)$1,886 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 117 1% Arts (2016 Watermain)$1,000 $1,000 Total Reimbursements $178,616 $581,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $581,000 Total Water Projects $3,662,961 $6,100,076 $3,078,999 $3,202,159 $3,330,245 $3,463,456 $3,601,994 $22,776,929 Revenues & Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Balance (January 1st) Connection Fee Proceeds $316,700 $301,400 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Interfund Reimbursement from Fund 423 (Dayton 3rd to 9th)$150,000 Interfund Reimbursement from Fund 422 (Dayton 3rd to 9th)$187,500 2015 Bond $5,300,000 General Fund Fire Hydrant Improvements $100,000 $114,600 $119,184 $123,900 $128,856 $134,010 $139,370 Total Secured Revenue (Utility Funds, Grants Loans, misc) $5,716,700 $753,500 $219,184 $223,900 $228,856 $234,010 $239,370 Unsecured Revenue 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 New revenue, grants, loans, bonds, interest, transfers Total Unsecured Revenue $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues Total Projects & Reimbursements Ending Cash Balance Projects for 2016-2021 1 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 5 9 o f 2 2 9 CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) 105th & 106th Ave SW Drainage Improvement Project. X $90,486 $716,800 $716,800 Dayton St and Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements- Dayton St Pump Station X $115,344 $302,700 $1,900,000 $50,000 $2,252,700 Willow Cr - Final Feasibility Study / Design/Construction (See Note 1)X $293,981 $205,200 $300,000 $300,000 $2,400,000 $2,600,000 $20,000 $5,825,200 Edmonds Marsh Channel Improvements $200,000 $500,000 $50,000 $750,000 Willow Creek Pipe Rehabilitation $82,500 $82,500 $550,607 $715,607 Northstream Culvert Abandonment South of Puget Dr - Assessment / Stabilization $45,500 $750,000 $795,500 Rehab/Replace of Northstream Culvert under Puget Dr (See Note 1)$10,000 $140,200 $1,500,000 $500,000 $2,140,200 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects - Seaview Infiltration (See Note 1)X $164,500 $680,500 $450,000 $500,000 $500,000 $50,000 $2,345,000 Improvments - 88th Ave W and 194th St SW $87,500 $300,000 $387,500 Improvements - Dayton St - 3rd to 9th $88,172 $324,000 $324,000 Improvements - Sierra Pl- 12th Ave N to Olympic $84,000 $240,000 $324,000 City-wide Drainage Replacement Projects $168,776 $158,000 $150,000 $150,000 $250,000 $350,000 $500,000 $1,558,000 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects $7,009 $45,000 $64,000 $66,000 $68,000 $68,000 $70,000 $381,000 Storm System Video Assessment $23,363 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $165,000 Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan (including asset management plan)$110,000 $110,000 $220,000 $797,131 $2,680,900 $6,297,000 $2,441,607 $3,248,000 $3,553,000 $680,000 $18,900,507 Perrinville Creek Basin Projects Capital Improvements Program PROJECT NAME SW Edmonds Basin Study Implementation Projects Edmonds Marsh Related Projects Projects for 2016-2021Fund 422 Storm Northstream Projects Annually Funded Projects Storm Drainage Improvement Projects Compliance-Related Projects Total Project 2 0 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 0 o f 2 2 9 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) SW Edmonds Basin Study Project 3 - Drainage portion of 238th SW Sidewalk project (connect sumps on 238th St SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System)$957,610 $81,283 $81,283 228th SW Corridor Improvements $68,500 $0 76th Ave W & 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $15,000 $330,575 $330,575 76th Ave W & 220th St SW Intersection Improvements $25,000 $25,000 $250,000 $300,000 236th SW Walkway Project $202,109 $202,109 Utility Replacements Dayton btwn 3rd & 9th Ave $187,500 $200,000 $1,900,000 $1,500,000 $200,000 $3,987,500 Stormwater Utility - Transportation Projects $50,258 $109,000 $112,000 $116,000 $119,000 $123,000 $125,000 $704,000 Total Reimbursements to 112 Fund $1,091,368 $910,467 $337,000 $2,041,000 $1,869,000 $323,000 $125,000 $5,605,467 105th & 106th Ave SW Drainage Improvement Project $6,325 $6,325 City-wide Drainage Replacement Projects $1,500 $800 $800 SW Edmonds Basin Study Project 3 - Drainage portion of 238th SW Sidewalk project (connect sumps on 238th St SW to Hickman Park infiltration system)$9,828 $0 228th SW Corridor Improvements $685 $0 76th Ave W & 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $3,306 $3,306 76th Ave W & 220th St SW Intersection Improvements $2,500 $2,500 226th SW Walkway Project $1,750 $1,750 Utility Replacement Dayton btwn 3rd & 9th Ave $2,000 $19,000 $15,000 $2,000 $38,000 Total Reimbursements to 117 Fund $12,013 $12,181 $2,000 $19,000 $17,500 $2,000 $0 $52,681 $1,103,381 $922,648 $339,000 $2,060,000 $1,886,500 $325,000 $125,000 $5,658,148 $1,900,512 $3,603,548 $6,636,000 $4,501,607 $5,134,500 $3,878,000 $805,000 $24,558,655 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $3,500,000 $52,995 $31,975 $30,000 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 $34,000 $75,000 $157,331 X $200,000 $433,750 $3,627,995 $389,306 $463,750 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 $34,000 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $1,125,000 $375,000 X $510,375 $337,500 $375,000 $375,000 $37,500 X $225,000 $225,000 $1,800,000 $1,950,000 $15,000 X $1,425,000 $37,500 $0 $0 $3,285,375 $975,000 $2,175,000 $2,325,000 $52,500 1. All or part of this project funded by secured grants or grants will be pursued, see Revenue section for details. 2 Assumes grant funding is 75% of total project costs per year beginning 2017 Total Secured Revenues Total Project & Transfers Ending Cash Balance Unsecured Revenue 2015-2021 Proceeds of Long-term debt (Bonds) Total Unsecured Revenues Notes: Estimated Connection Fees (capital facilities charge) Beginning Balance (January 1st) Total Revenue Grants (Secured) - Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow Cr - Final Feasibility Study/Marsh Restoration Grants (Secured) - Perrinville Creek Flow Management -Seaview Infiltration Grants (Unsecured) - Rehab/Replace of Northstream Culvert under Puget Dr (See Note 2) Grants (Unsecured) - Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects (See Note 2) Grants (Unsecured) - Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow Cr - Feasibility Study/Marsh Restoration (See Note 2) Grants (Unsecured) - Dayton St & Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements (See Note 2) Projects for 2016-2021 Proceeds of Long-term debt (Bonds) Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 Total Project & Reimbursements Total Reimbursements To 117 - Arts Reimbursements To 112 - Street Fund 2 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 1 o f 2 2 9 CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Lift Stations 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, & 15 $3,000 $0 Phase 1 Sanitary Sewer Replacement $36,566 $0 Phase 2 Sanitary Sewer Replacement $269,344 $0 2015 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $1,460,567 $22,000 $22,000 2015 Sewerline Overlays $14,223 $0 2016 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $161,222 $1,907,104 $1,907,104 2016 Sewerline Overlays $220,000 $220,000 2017 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $278,750 $1,551,905 $1,830,655 2018 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $287,113 $1,598,462 $1,885,575 2019 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $295,726 $1,646,416 $1,942,142 2020 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $304,598 $1,695,809 $2,000,406 2021 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $313,736 $1,746,683 $2,060,419 2022 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $323,148 $323,148 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation $92,000 $1,006,263 $412,000 $424,360 $437,091 $450,204 $463,710 $3,193,627 Lift Station 1 Metering & Flow Study $80,000 $120,000 $120,000 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study $10,000 $290,000 $290,000 $2,126,922 $3,844,117 $2,251,018 $2,318,548 $2,388,105 $2,459,748 $2,533,541 $15,795,076 Reimbursement to Fund 421 (Dayton 3rd to 9th)$150,000 $150,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 (228th Project)$177,254 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 (212th & 76th Improvements)$70,000 $700,000 $700,000 $247,254 $850,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $850,000 $2,374,176 $4,694,117 $2,251,018 $2,318,548 $2,388,105 $2,459,748 $2,533,541 $16,645,076 Capital Improvements Program Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitations Sewer Main Replacement and CIPP Infiltration & Inflow Study & Projects Total Projects, Transfers & Reimbursements Reimbursements & Contributions Total Reimbursements Projects for 2016-2021 PROJECT NAME Fund 423 - Sewer Projects Total Projects 2 2 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 2 o f 2 2 9 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $384,400 $310,200 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $8,700,000 $9,084,400 $310,200 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2015 Bond Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 Beginning Balance (January 1st) Sewer Connection Fees Ending Cash Balance Total Secured Revenue (Utility Funds, Grants Loans, misc) Unsecured Revenue 2015-2021 New revenue, grants, loans, bonds, interest, transfers Total Unsecured Revenue Total Revenues Total Projects & Reimbursements 2 3 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 3 o f 2 2 9 Capital Improvements Program Fund 423.76 - WWTP PROJECT NAME CFP 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total (2016-2021) Repair and Replacement $35,664 $25,000 $25,000 $250,000 $250,000 $330,000 $330,000 $1,210,000 Construction Projects - In House $15,000 $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 Construction Projects Contracted $2,075,957 $2,856,000 $2,100,000 $250,000 $250,000 $300,000 $600,000 $6,356,000 Debt Service - Principle and Interest $257,560 $257,516 $256,163 $255,371 $255,929 $256,371 $256,902 $1,538,252 Total Project $2,384,181 $3,138,516 $2,381,163 $755,371 $755,929 $906,371 $1,206,902 Projects less revenue from outside partnership $2,221,131 $3,105,466 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 Revenues and Cash Balances 2015-2021 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st)$200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 Intergovernmental $2,221,131 $3,105,466 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 Interest Earnings $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Miscellaneous (biosolids, Lynnwood, etc)$13,000 $13,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Grants, Incentives and Rebate for Engergy Eff. Projects $150,000 $20,000 $20,000 Subtotal $2,584,181 $3,338,516 $2,581,163 $955,371 $1,305,929 $1,456,371 $1,756,902 Total Revenue $2,584,181 $3,338,516 $2,581,163 $955,371 $1,305,929 $1,456,371 $1,756,902 Total Project ($2,384,181)($3,138,516)($2,381,163)($755,371)($755,929)($906,371)($1,206,902) Ending Cash Balance $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 Interest earned estimated at 0.75% per year Contribution breakdown by agency 2015 Estimate 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Edmonds 50.79%$1,128,046 $1,577,173 $1,191,520 $375,987 $376,270 $452,675 $605,306 Mountlake Terrace 23.17%$514,725 $719,661 $543,688 $171,562 $171,691 $206,555 $276,200 Olympic View Water & Sewer District 16.55%$367,619 $513,986 $388,305 $122,531 $122,623 $147,523 $197,263 Ronald Sewer District 9.49%$210,741 $294,647 $222,599 $70,242 $70,295 $84,569 $113,083 TOTALS 100.00%$2,221,131 $3,105,466 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 *In 2019 per the agreement, fund balance will increase to $550,000. Projects for 2016-2021 2 4 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 4 o f 2 2 9 CIP PARKS PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS 25 Packet Page 165 of 229 26 Packet Page 166 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Anderson Center Field/Court/Stage ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $125,000 700 Main Street, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 2.3 acres; zoned public neighborhood park/openspace field PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Upgrades to youth sports field, picnic and playground amenities and children’s play equipment. Replacement and renovation of amphitheater in 2015 with improved courtyard area and drainage. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: As a neighborhood park, the Frances Anderson Center serves the community with various sports, playground and field activities including various special events. Upgrade and additions essential to meet demand for use. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $100,000 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $100,000 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 * all or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 27 Packet Page 167 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Brackett’s Landing Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $175,000 South: Main Street and Railroad Avenue south of Edmonds Ferry Terminal on Puget Sound North: 2.7 acres with tidelands and adjacent to Department of Natural Resources public tidelands with Underwater Park South: 2.0 acres with tidelands south of ferry terminal. Regional park/Zoned commercial waterfront. Protected as public park through Deed-of-Right; partnership funding IAC/WWRC/LWCF /DNR-ALEA & Snohomish Conservation Futures PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Landscape beautification, irrigation, furnishings/bench maintenance, exterior painting, repairs, jetty improvements/repair, north cove sand, habitat improvement, fences, interpretive signs, structure repairs, sidewalk improvements, restroom phased rehabilitation in 2016 and 2018. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Retention of infrastructure for major waterfront park, regional park that serves as the gateway to Edmonds from the Kitsap Peninsula. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $5,000 $50,000 $5,000 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $5,000 $50,000 $5,000 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 28 Packet Page 168 of 229 PROJECT NAME: City Park Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $347,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete play/spray ground project, field renovation, continued pathway, access improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This is for completion of the play and spray revitalization and ongoing upgrades to City Park as referenced in the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $272,000 $0 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 1% for Art TOTAL $272,000 $0 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 *all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the arts 29 Packet Page 169 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Civic Center Complex Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $650,000 6th Street N. and Edmonds Street, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County 8.1 acres / property owned and leased from Edmonds School District until 2021; Community Park/Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Park Development Bleacher/stadium repairs, infield mix, baseball/softball turf repair, retaining wall, fence and play structure replacement, skate park and facility amenities, tennis and sports courts repair and resurfacing, irrigation. Landscape and site furnishing improvements. Master Plan in 2016, development improvements based on Master Plan in 2021. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Overall capital improvements for Civic Center Field. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study 100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $600,000 1% for Art TOTAL $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $600,000 *all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 30 Packet Page 170 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Sunset Avenue Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $100,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a multi-use path on the west side of Sunset Ave with expansive views of the Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains. The multi-use path will connect the downtown business district, surrounding neighborhoods, water access points, and the existing parks and trails system. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This multi-use path has been a priority for the City of Edmonds for several years. It is included in 5 different City plans, the Transportation Improvement Plan, Non-Motorized Section; the Parks Recreation and Open Plan; the City comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan; the Capital Improvement Plan; and the Shoreline Master Program. Specifically, the Parks Recreation and Open Space Plan identified Sunset Avenue Overlook priorities, namely improved connectivity and multi-modal access, complete the bicycle and pedestrian route system, identify scenic routes and view areas, and landscape improvements. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $100,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 31 Packet Page 171 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Fishing Pier & Restrooms ESTIMATED COST: $225,000 LWCF/IAC Acquisition and Development Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Fishing pier parking lot landscape improvements. Re-tile and renovate restroom facilities. Electrical upgrade, rail and shelter replacements / renovations. Work with WDFW on structural repairs of concrete spalling on pier subsurface. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Capital improvements to retain capital assets and enhance western gateway to the Puget Sound. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $175,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $175,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 32 Packet Page 172 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Community Park / Athletic Complex at the Former Woodway High School ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $655,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop community park and regional athletic complex with lighted fields and recreational amenities in partnership with Edmonds School District, community colleges, user groups, and other organizations. Development dependent upon successful regional capital campaign. $10m - $12M project. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The site is currently an underutilized and undermaintained facility with great potential as community multi-use active park. Site has existing controlled access, greenbelt, parking and 4-court tennis facility with substandard fields. Highly urbanized area with 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance supported by user fees. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $500,000 $155,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $500,000 $155,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 33 Packet Page 173 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Maplewood Park Improvements ESTIMATED COST: $15,000 89th Place West and 197th Street SW, Edmonds City limits, within Snohomish County 12.7 acres (10.7 acres Open Space & 2 acres Neighborhood Park) Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to the picnic, roadway, parking, play area and natural trail system to Maplewood Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset to the neighborhood park system. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 34 Packet Page 174 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Marina Beach Park Improvements ESTIMATED COST: $1,505,000 South of the Port of Edmonds on Admiral Way South, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County 4.5 acres / Regional Park / Zoned Commercial Waterfront, marina beach south purchased with federal transportation funds. WWRC / IAC Acquisition Project; Protected through Deed-of-Right RCW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replace play structure in 2016. Begin development of Master plan, daylighting Willow Creek in 2018-2020. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset to the regional waterfront park system. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $100,000 $50,000 $350,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $100,000 $50,000 $350,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 35 Packet Page 175 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Mathay Ballinger Park ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $35,000 78th Place W. & 241st. St. at Edmonds City Limits. 1.5 acres/Neighborhood Park/Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install path from Interurban Trail spur terminal to parking lot. Improve picnic area. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset in the neighborhood park system. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $20,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $20,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 36 Packet Page 176 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Meadowdale Clubhouse Grounds ESTIMATED COST: $85,000 6801 N. Meadowdale Road, Edmonds City limits, within Snohomish County 1.3 acres / Neighborhood Park / Zoned RS20 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to the parking area, wooded area, trail system and landscaping of exterior clubhouse at Meadowdale Clubhouse site. Replace playground. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset with installation that provides community use of the facility and north Edmonds programming for day care, recreation classes and preschool activities. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $75,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $75,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 37 Packet Page 177 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Meadowdale Playfields ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $500,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Partnerships with City of Lynnwood and Edmonds School District to renovate Meadowdale Playfields, installation of synthetic turf for year around play. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Partnership to leverage funds and increase field use for Edmonds citizens. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 38 Packet Page 178 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Pine Ridge Park Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $20,000 83rd Avenue West and 204th St. SW, Edmonds City Limits, within Snohomish County 22 acres (20 acres zoned openspace/2 acres neighborhood park) Zoned Public; Adopted Master Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Forest improvements, habitat improvements, tree planting, wildlife habitat attractions, trail improvements, signs, parking. Natural trail links under Main Street connecting to Yost Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Retention of natural open space habitat site and regional trail connections. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 New additions meet the 1% for the Arts Ordinance requirements 39 Packet Page 179 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Seaview Park Improvements ESTIMATED COST: $35,000 80th Street West and 186th Street SW, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 5.5 acres; Neighborhood Park/ Zoned Public; Purchased and developed with LWCF funds through IAC; protected with Deed- Of-Right PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Annual repair and upgrade to facilities and fields. Re-surface tennis courts, pathway improvements, and play area maintenance. Renovate restrooms. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Site serves as neighborhood park with children’s play area, open lawn, softball/baseball fields and soccer fields, restroom facilities, basketball court, parking and tennis courts. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $5,000 1% for Art TOTAL $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $5,000 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 40 Packet Page 180 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Sierra Park Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $70,000 80th Street West and 191th Street SW, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 5.5 acres; Neighborhood Park/ Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improve pathways and interpretive braille signs. Field renovation to include field drainage for turf repair. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Site serves as neighborhood park with children’s play area, open lawn, softball/baseball fields and soccer fields, portable restroom facilities, basketball hoops, parking and Braille interpretive trail for the blind. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $0 $0 $70,000 $0 $0 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $70,000 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 41 Packet Page 181 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Yost Park/Pool Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $420,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pool replastering, tile work, and annual anticipated and unanticipated repairs. Add in-pool play amenities. Park site improvements and repairs to trails and bridges, picnicking facilities, landscaping, parking, tennis/pickleball courts and erosion control. ADA improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Beautiful natural area serves as upland area for environmental education programs as well as enjoyable setting for seasonal Yost Pool users. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $120,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 1% for Art TOTAL $120,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 42 Packet Page 182 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Parklet Development, 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $80,000 A parklet is a small urban park that is made by creating a sidewalk extension that provides more space and amenities for people using the street. Usually parklets are installed on top of parking lanes and use one or more parking spaces, but do not permanently impact the underlying street. Parklets typically extend out from the sidewalk at the level of the sidewalk to the width of the adjacent parking space creating a patio and seating area, often including plantings. Parklets are public space and open to everyone. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop one or more parklets on the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor. The first parklet will be created on Sprague St. just east of 4th Avenue on the north side, based on site concepts in the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Plan. The design will be developed with Parks crew and an artist/landscape consultant. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Provide a small urban park along the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor with views of Puget Sound and seating on a popular walking route. Parklets as a resting and a gathering space highlight the social function integral to streets. The importance of additional small gathering spaces is referred to in both the Community Cultural Plan and the PROS Plan. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Construction $40,000 $40,000 TOTAL $0 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 43 Packet Page 183 of 229 PROJECT NAME: City Gateway Replacements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $40,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Design and construct new gateway elements at SR 104 and 5th Ave. S and at Sunset and Main St. to replace aging and deteriorated signage. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The PROS Plan, Community Cultural Plan and Streetscape Plan all refer to the importance of these visual “gateways” to the City of Edmonds. New signage with artistic elements will enhance the gateways and reinforce Edmonds reputation as a cultural destination for visitors. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Repairs & Maintenance $40,000 TOTAL $0 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 44 Packet Page 184 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Outdoor Fitness Zones ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $50,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create outdoor fitness zones by adding fitness equipment within the park system. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Provide outdoor places to exercise to improve the health and wellness of citizens and park users, which provides adults the opportunity to exercise while their children play. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Construction $50,000 TOTAL $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 45 Packet Page 185 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Citywide Beautification ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $147,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Beautification citywide to include library, Senior Center, outdoor plaza, city park, corner parks, irrigation, planting, mulch, FAC Center, vegetation, tree plantings, streetscape/gateways/street tree planting, flower basket poles. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve beautification citywide and provide comprehensive adopted plan for beautification and trees. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 . COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 21,000 21,000 1% for Art TOTAL $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 46 Packet Page 186 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Paving ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $50,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Includes miscellaneous small paving and park walkway improvements citywide. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Capital improvement needs citywide in park system. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Repair & Maint $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 1% for Art TOTAL $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 * all or a portion of these projects may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 47 Packet Page 187 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Citywide Park Improvements / Misc Small Projects ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $280,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Citywide park facility and public landscaping improvements including signage, interpretive signs, buoys, tables, benches, trash containers, drinking fountains, backstops, bike racks, lighting, small landscaping projects, play areas and equipment. Landscape improvements at beautification areas and corner parks, public gateway entrances into the city and 4th Avenue Corridor from Main St. to the Edmonds Center for the Arts, SR 104, street tree and streetscape improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Overall capital improvements for citywide park facilities and streetscape improvements in public areas. SCHEDULE: 2014-2020 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering / Administration Construction $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 1% for Art TOTAL $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40000 48 Packet Page 188 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Sports Field Upgrade / Playground Partnerships ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $75,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Partnerships with local schools, organizations, or neighboring jurisdictions to upgrade additional youth ball field or play facilities or playgrounds to create neighborhood park facilities at non-City facilities. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Annual partnerships with matching funds to create additional facilities. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 49 Packet Page 189 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Unpaved Trail/Bike Path/Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $ 40,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete portions of designated trail through public parks to meet the goals of the Bicycle Plan and Pathway Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Walking and connections was listed as a high priority in the comprehensive Park Plan from public survey data. Creating trails, paths and bike links is essential to meet the need for the community. Provides for the implementation of the citywide bicycle path improvements and the elements and goals of the citywide walkway plan. Linked funding with engineering funding. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $10,000 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $10,000 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 * all or part of these projects may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 50 Packet Page 190 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Cultural Arts Facility Needs Study ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $unk PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Initiate feasibility study of providing and promoting Cultural / Arts facilities for the City of Edmonds. The need for visual and performing arts facilities is a high priority stated in the adopted updated Community Cultural Arts Plan 2001 and in the 2008 update process. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The City of Edmonds desires to secure and provide for public Cultural Arts facilities in the community. The emphasis on the arts as a high priority creates the need to study performance, management and long term potential for arts related facilities. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art TOTAL * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 51 Packet Page 191 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Marsh/Hatchery Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $235,000 South of Dayton Street and Harbor Square, east of BSNF railroad, west of SR 104, north of UNOCAL 23.2 acres; Natural Open Space / Zoned Open Space PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support day-lighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Sidewalk / pathway repairs and continuation of walkway / viewing path to the hatchery if environmentally feasible. Hatchery repairs as needed. Work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, Earthcorps and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. This also includes planning for the outfall of Willow Creek into Marina Beach Park; completion of the Marina Beach Master Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and fresh water marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co-fund the completion of a master plan using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. As well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Professional Services $70,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 TOTAL $105,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 52 Packet Page 192 of 229 ` PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Cemetery Mapping ESTIMATED COST: $ 100,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Edmonds Memorial Cemetery was deeded to the City in 1982. The City has been operating the cemetery with no markings, rows, aisles, or surveyed mapping. It is essential that the City survey/map/and mark the cemetery so as to effectively manage the plots. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Operations of a public cemetery, with effective and accurate stewardship. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study $100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 53 Packet Page 193 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Civic Playfield Acquisition and/or Development ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $4,750,000 6th Street N. and Edmonds Street, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County 8.1 acres / property owned and leased from Edmonds School District until 2021; Community Park/Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire Civic field from School District. Develop this 8.1 acre property for continued use as an important community park, sports tourism hub and site of some of Edmonds largest and most popular special events in downtown Edmonds. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Gain tenure and control in perpetuity over this important park site for the citizens of Edmonds. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Acquisition $1,950,000 Planning/Study $100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $3,000,000 1% for Art TOTAL $1,950,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 54 Packet Page 194 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Senior Center Park and surrounding areas, beach access ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,050,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park and parking lot when the center is rebuilt. Rebuilt center will be available as a community center in the evenings and weekends. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain capital assets and provide safety and better accessibility for Seniors, and be available for the whole community. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beachfront access. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study $25,000 $25,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $500,000 $500,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $25,000 $525,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 55 Packet Page 195 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Pine Ridge Park Forest Management Study ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $50,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Hire consultant to develop a plan for best forest management practices in Pine Ridge Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This forest park is under stress from over-mature trees especially alder and others. This study will give the Parks Division necessary guidance to better manage this park to become a more healthy forest and open space. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study $50,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 56 Packet Page 196 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Debt Service on Approved Capital Projects and Acquisitions ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,006,059 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Approximate annual debt service payments on: City Hall: Debt retired end of 2014 Marina Beach / Library Roof: $ $82,261 PSCC (Edmonds Center for the Arts): $55,631 Anderson Center Seismic Retrofit: $29,784 PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Debt service to pay for approved capitol projects SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art Principal & Interest $171,400 $169,383 $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 TOTAL $171,400 $169,383 $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 57 Packet Page 197 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Open Space/Land ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,400,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquisition of properties when feasible that will benefit citizens that fit the definitions and needs identified in the Parks Comprehensive Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Fulfills needs of citizens for parks, recreation and open space. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Land $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 1% for Art TOTAL $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 58 Packet Page 198 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Waterfront/Tidelands Acquisition ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,200,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire waterfront parcels and tidelands wherever feasible to secure access to Puget Sound for public use as indentified in the Parks, Recreation & Open Space Comprehensive Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Public ownership of waterfront and tidelands on Puget Sound. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 59 Packet Page 199 of 229 PROJECT NAME: 4th Avenue Corridor Enhancement ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $4,325,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Begin 4th Avenue site development with temporary and/or moveable surface elements and amenities to begin drawing attention and interest to the corridor and create stronger visual connection between Main Street and the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Possible projects may include surface art, interpretive signage and wayfinding, or low level lighting. The Cultural Heritage Walking Tour project, funded in part with a matching grant from the National Park Service Preserve America grant program, will be implemented in 2011-12. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The corridor improvements in the public right of way will encourage pedestrian traffic & provide a strong visual connection along 4th Ave. Improvements will enhance connectivity as an attractive walking corridor & contribute to the economic vitality in the downtown by encouraging the flow of visitors between the downtown retail & the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Timing for 30% design phase is crucial as the City addresses utility projects in the area & will assist the City in the process of identifying & acquiring funding sources for the total project implementation phase. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $1,425,000 $2,900,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $1,425,000 $2,900,000 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 60 Packet Page 200 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Cultural Heritage Tour and Way-Finding Signage ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create a downtown Edmonds walking tour highlighting a dozen historic sites with artist made interpretive markers, and add way-finding signage for the downtown area. Completed. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Promote tourism and economic development in the core downtown. The walking tour and interpretive signage focuses on local history and as unique artist made pieces also reflect the arts orientation of the community. Improved way-finding signage which points out major attractions and services/amenities such as theaters, museums, beaches, train station, shopping, dining and lodging promotes both tourism and economic vitality in the downtown /waterfront activity center. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction 1% for Art TOTAL 61 Packet Page 201 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Dayton Street Plaza ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $168,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Renovate small park and plaza at north end of old public works building, 2nd & Dayton Street. Improve landscaping, plaza, and accessibility. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Capital improvements to public gathering space and creation of additional art amenities and streetscape improvements in downtown on main walking route. Financial support from Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation, Hubbard Foundation and Edmonds in Bloom. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $168,000 1% for Art TOTAL $168,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 62 Packet Page 202 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Senior Center Park and surrounding areas, beach access ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,050,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park and parking lot when the center is rebuilt. Rebuilt center will be available as a community center in the evenings and weekends. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements to retain capital assets and provide safety and better accessibility for Seniors, and be available for the whole community. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beachfront access. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study $25,000 $25,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $500,000 $500,000 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $25,000 $525,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 63 Packet Page 203 of 229 PROJECT NAME: City Park Revitalization ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $854,900 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete play/spray ground project, field renovation, continued pathway, access improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This project combines two play areas and the completion of the master plan from 1992. This is very competitive for State grant funding, as it will be using a repurposing water system. This will be a much valued revitalization and addition to the City’s oldest and most cherished park. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $854,900 1% for Art TOTAL $854,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 *all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the arts 64 Packet Page 204 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Community Park / Athletic Complex at the Former Woodway High School ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $655,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop community park and regional athletic complex with lighted fields and recreational amenities in partnership with Edmonds School District, community colleges, user groups, and other organizations. Development dependent upon successful regional capital campaign. $10m - $12M project. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The site is currently an underutilized and undermaintained facility with great potential as community multi-use active park. Site has existing controlled access, greenbelt, parking and 4-court tennis facility with substandard fields. Highly urbanized area with 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance supported by user fees. SCHEDULE: 2015-2026 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021- 2026 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $500,000 $155,000 1% for Art TOTAL $500,000 $155,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 65 Packet Page 205 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Wetland Mitigation ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $6,343 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support day-lighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Sidewalk / pathway repairs and continuation of walkway / viewing path to the hatchery if environmentally feasible. Work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, People for Puget Sound and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. This also includes planning for the outfall of Willow Creek into Marina Beach Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and fresh water marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co-fund the completion of a master plan using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. As well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $6,343 1% for Art TOTAL $6,343 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 66 Packet Page 206 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Marsh/Willow Creek Daylighting ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,200,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support day-lighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Sidewalk / pathway repairs and continuation of walkway / viewing path to the hatchery if environmentally feasible. Work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, People for Puget Sound and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. This also includes planning for the outfall of Willow Creek into Marina Beach Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and fresh water marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co-fund the completion of a master plan using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. As well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 1% for Art TOTAL $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. 67 Packet Page 207 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Fishing Pier & Restrooms ESTIMATED COST: $1,500,000 LWCF/IAC Acquisition and Development Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Fishing pier parking lot landscape improvements. Re-tile and renovate restroom facilities. Electrical upgrade, rail and shelter replacements / renovations. Work with WDFW on structural repairs of concrete spalling on pier subsurface. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Capital improvements to retain capital assets and enhance western gateway to the Puget Sound. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $200,000 $1,300,000 1% for Art TOTAL $200,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 68 Packet Page 208 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Public Market (Downtown Waterfront) ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown * all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with community partners to establish a public market, year around, on the downtown waterfront area. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The project will help to create a community gathering area, boost economic development, bring tourists to town, and will be a valuable asset to Edmonds. SCHEDULE: This project depends on the ability to secure grant funding, and community partners willing to work with the city to establish this. This potentially can be accomplished by 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1% for Art TOTAL 69 Packet Page 209 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Outdoor Fitness Zones ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $125,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create outdoor fitness zones by adding fitness equipment within the park system. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Provide outdoor places to exercise to improve the health and wellness of citizens and park users, which provides adults the opportunity to exercise while their children play. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Construction $125,000 TOTAL $125,000 70 Packet Page 210 of 229 PROJECT NAME: Veteran’s Plaza ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $10,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The establishment of a Veteran’s Plaza was unanimously approved by the City Council in 2014. It will serve as a tribute to the patriotic and courageous men and women who served this nation. The Plaza will reflect the bravery, sacrifice and strength they gave our country. The design will accommodate flagpoles (in their existing location), space for display of military seals and a Plaza, seating areas for reflection, some educational monuments or placards, and existing hardscape and significant trees. The address is 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 and is adjacent to the Edmonds Public Safety Building. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The Veteran’s Plaza will serve as a focal point which raises awareness of the contributions made by veterans and illustrates the high respect the citizens of Edmonds have for the men and women who have defended the rights and freedoms of this nation. It will provide a tribute for the men and women who have served and are serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. The Plaza will establish a central site for the citizens of Edmonds to conduct official observances, activities and ceremonies to honor veterans including Veterans Day. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $10,000 $475,000 Construction 1% for Art TOTAL $10,000 $475,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 71 Packet Page 211 of 229 Page 1 of 4 10/22/2015 FUND PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION 001 SR99 Access Management Study Evaluate options to implement access management improvements between 220th St and 224th St. 112 228th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 95th Pl. W X Install two way left turn lane along stretch and install sidewalk. 112 ADA Transition Plan Update the City's Transition Plan to comply with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 112 Minor Sidewalk Program X Improve pedestrian safety along short stretches throughout the City. 112 Citywide Protective/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion Convert Protected left-turn signals to permissive turn movements to improve level of service at signalized intersections. 112 SR-104 @ 226th St. SW / 15th St. SW Intersection Improvements X Extend left turn storage area for WB movement and non-motorized transportation improvements. 112 SR-104 @ 95th Pl. W Intersection Improvements X Traffic signal phasing modifications; upgrade ADA curb ramps; and add C-Curb for access management. 112 SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements X Install traffic signal to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. 112 SR-104 @ 100th Ave. W Intersection Improvements X Implement Westgate Circulation Plan, install midblock crossing along 100th Ave. W; and re-channelize 100th Ave. W with bike lanes / sharrows. 112 SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements X Add a 2nd WB left turn lane. 112 232nd St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. W to SR-104 X Improve pedestrian safety along 232nd from 100th to SR-104 112 236th St. Walkway from Edmonds Way to 97th Ave X Improve pedestrian safety along 236th from Edmonds Way to 97th Ave. 112 84th Ave. Walkway from 238th St. to 234th St. X Improve pedestrian safety along 84th from 238th to 234th 112 80th Ave. Walkway from 206th St. to 212th St. X Improve pedestrian safety along 80th from 206th to 212th 112 218th St Walkway from 76th Ave. to 84th Ave. X Improve pedestrian safety along 218th from 76th to 84th 112 238th St. Walkway from Hwy. 99 to SR-104 X Improve pedestrian safety along 238th from Hwy 99 to SR-104 112 191th St. Walkway from 80th Ave. to 76th Ave. X Improve pedestrian safety along 191th from 80th to 76th 112 95th Pl. Walkway from 224th St. to 220th St. X Improve pedestrian safety along 95th from 224th to 220th 112 104th Ave. Walkway from 238th St. to 106th Ave. X Improve pedestrian safety along 104th from 238th to 106th 112 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S X Improve pedestrian safety along Elm Way from 8th to 9th 112 80th Ave. Walkway from 218th St. SW to 220th St. X Improve pedestrian safety along 80th from 218th to 220th 112 236th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W X Improve pedestrian safety along 236th from Hwy 99 to 76th 112 238th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W X Improve pedestrian safety along 238th from Hwy. 99 to 76th 112 80th Ave. W / 180th St SW Walkway from 188th St. SW to OVD X Improve pedestrian safety along 80th / 180th from 188th to OVD 112 189th Pl. SW Walkway from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave. W X Improve pedestrian safety along 189th from 80th to 76th 112 Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St.X Improve ferry queueing by extending storage area CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2015 TO 2016) ADDED PROJECTS Packet Page 212 of 229 Page 2 of 4 10/22/2015 016 Anderson Center Roofing Project Subject of a DP for 2016 funding 016 Fire Station #20 Generator Subject of a DP for 2016 funding. 016 City Hall Carpet Replacement Starting a cycle to replace all carpeting 016 City Hall Security Measures Insufficient funding last year. Moved project to 2016, added funding 016 Meadowdale Gutter Replacement Insufficient funding last year. Moved project to 2016, added funding 016 Fire station #17 Bay Ceiling Subject of a DP for 2016 funding. 016 Anderson Center Flooring Subject of a DP for 2016 funding. 125 Parklet development, 4th Ave Corridor Consistent with Community Cultural and PROS plan. 125 City Gateway Replacements Consistent with PROS plan. 125 Outdoor Fitness Zones Consistent with PROS plan. 125 Sr. Ctr Walkway/Park Design Consistent with PROS plan. 125 Civic Center Master Plan x After purchase, work with community to master plan downtown park. 125 Meadowdale Playfields Same as last year, but carrying it over: Installing turf fields, in partnership with Lynnwood and Edmonds School District, and contingent upon grant funds. 126 Trackside Warning System at Main & Dayton Streets X 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Standards 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 ADA Transition Plan 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 Traffic Calming Program 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 Citywide Protective/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 Minor Sidewalk Program X 2016 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 132 Outdoor Fitness Zones Consistent with PROS plan 132 Fishing Pier Rehab Completion of fishing pier rehab 421 2022 Replacement Program Estimated future costs for waterline replacements. 421 Dayton 3rd to 9th Utility Improvements Combined water/sewer/storm utility replacement project funding is from the respective utilities' replacement project funding. 421 2016 Waterline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to waterline replacements. 422 Improvements - Sierra Pl - 12th Ave N to Olympic Outfall causing erosion on slope. Advanced maintenance fix will be constructed this fall. This new project would divert some storm flows to minimize future slope erosion. 423 2022 Sewer Replacement/Rehab/Improvements Estimated future costs for sewerline replacements/rehab/impr. 423 2016 Sewerline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to sewerline repl/rehab/impr. Packet Page 213 of 229 Page 3 of 4 10/22/2015 FUND PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION 112 Walnut St. @ 9th Intersection Improvements X Convert All-way Stop intersection to signalized intersection 112 Maple St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave. S Provide safe sidewalk along short missing link (ranked #8 out of 12 projects in Short Walkway list of 2015 Transportation Plan). 112 Meadowdale Beach Rd. Walkway X Provide sidewalk along missing link (ranked # 24 out of 28 in Long Walkway list of 2015 Transportation Plan) 112 Walnut St. Walkway from 6th to 7th X Provide sidewalk along missing link (ranked #9 out of 12 projects in Short Walkway list of 2015 Transportation Plan). 112 4th Ave. W Corridor Enhancement X Create more attractive and safer corridor along 4th Ave. (Inserted in PARKS CFP) 112 Olympic Ave. Walkway from Main St. to SR-524 X Reconstruct sidewalk - The Transportation Committee removed this project from the walkway list during the 2015 Plan update, since there is existing sidewalk on the corridor. 112 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave. S X Completed in 2015. 016 Cemetery Building Gutter Replacement Removed from project list at this time 421 2013 Replacement Program Completed in 2014. 421 Telemetry System Improvements Deleted. Discussions with operations department revealed that improvements are maintenance that they do as part of their operational budget. Operations will do this work as part of their operations and maintenance tasks. 421 2014 Waterline Overlays Completed in 2014. 421 76th Avenue Waterline Replacement Completed in 2014. 423 2013 CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Completed in 2014. 423 224th Sewerline Replacement Project Completed in 2014. CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2015 TO 2016) DELETED PROJECTS Packet Page 214 of 229 Page 4 of 4 10/22/2015 FUND PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE 001 Alternatives analysis to study, 1) waterfront access issues emphasizing and prioritizing near term solutions to providing emergency access, also including, but not limited to, 2) at grade conflicts where Main and Dayton streets intersect BNSF rail lines, 3) pedestrian/bicycle access, and 4) options to the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal Project (identified as Modified Alternative 2) within the 2004 Final Environmental Impact Statement. X The project was added to the CFP and moved from the 112 Fund to the General Fund. The project name was revised to "Edmonds Waterfront Analysis" and the project description is the wording approved at the City Council meeting in December 2013. 422 Edmonds Marsh Channel Improvements Project broken out from Willow Creek Daylight project to focus on channel and other improvements upstream of the proposed daylighting project. This project will also improve the conditions at SR-104 and Dayton St. 423.76 Repair and Replacement Secondary Clarifier #3 has turned to out be more than a coating project. In 2015 we evaluated soil and ground water conditions to determine that the foundation slab will need to be reinforced. Design will continue through 2015 and the repair will be made in 2016. Pagoda repairs have been placed on hold for time being. 423.76 Upgrades Offsite Flow Telemetry: This project will modify the offsite monitoring stations to solar power in an effort to significantly lower our energy bills. All stations should be completed in 2015. Control System Upgrade: Replace aging control system equipment, provide for redundancy and upgrade the operating platform. At the end of 2015 all PLC's with the exception of the 600 PlC will be complete. The 600 PLC is scheduled for spring 2016. SSI project: All equipment is purchased, all requirements are on track for meeting the new requirements in May 2016. Operator training is currently being developed although there is no standard or means to ensure compliance. Phase 4 energy improvements: The project should be completed by end of 2015. Compressors were replace in 2014, blowers and diffusers in 2015. The project has given us the opportunity to optimize the aeration control system. 423.76 Studies and Consulting We will continue to evaluate UV vs. Hypo for disinfection, begin the design for solids system enhancements and look at gasification as a future alternative to the SSI. Much of this work will be accomplished under the ESCO model and focus on energy improvements. CHANGED PROJECTS CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2015 TO 2016) Packet Page 215 of 229    AM-8170     6. C.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:12/08/2015 Time:5 Minutes   Submitted For:Shane Hope, Director Submitted By:Shane Hope Department:Development Services Type: Action  Information Subject Title Authorization to Execute Professional Services Agreement for Highway 99 Subarea Planning Project. Recommendation Vote to authorize the Mayor to sign the professional services agreement for the Highway 99 Subarea Planning Project Previous Council Action The City Council approved $100,000 in the 2015 City Budget for developing a Highway 99 Subarea Plan. Narrative The proposed professional services agreement (see attachment) provide $100,000, as approved in the 2015 City Budget, for professional services to develop the Highway 99 Subarea Plan.   Note:  This does not include any additional funds that the City Council is considering for the 2016 Budget, which would provide for additional public involvement and SEPA analysis.  The additional funds and tasks would be included in an addendum to the original agreement.  Authorizing the agreement for $100,000 now allows the project to move forward sooner. The selected contractor is Fregonese Associates, a highly-qualified firm out of Portland.  This selection results from an RFQ process that yielded 6 responses, followed by interviews with the top candidates and reference checks. Attachments Hwy 99 Subarea Prof. Agreement Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Scott Passey 12/03/2015 10:47 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/03/2015 12:21 PM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 12/03/2015 12:26 PM Form Started By: Shane Hope Started On: 12/03/2015 08:57 AM Final Approval Date: 12/03/2015  Packet Page 216 of 229 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into between the City of Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and Fregonese Associates, hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant". WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of the Consultant to provide services with respect to the Highway 99 Subarea Planning Project; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. The scope of work shall include all services and material necessary to accomplish the above mentioned objectives in accordance with the Scope of Services that is marked as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Payments. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work. A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be on a time and expense basis as set forth on the fee schedule found in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; provided, in no event shall the payment for work performed pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of $100,000. B. All vouchers shall be submitted by the Consultant to the City for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each voucher to the Consultant. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City biweekly during the progress of the work for payment of completed phases of the project. Billings shall be reviewed in conjunction with the City's warrant process. No billing shall be considered for payment that has not been submitted to the City three days prior to the scheduled cut-off date. Such late vouchers will be checked by the City and payment will be made in the next regular payment cycle. C. The costs records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three years after final payment. Copies shall be made available upon request. 3. Ownership and use of documents. All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data and any and all other work product prepared or gathered by the Consultant in preparation for the services rendered by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be and are the property of the Consultant and shall not be considered public records; provided, however, that: Packet Page 217 of 229 A. All final reports, presentations and testimony prepared by the Consultant shall become the property of the City upon their presentation to and acceptance by the City and shall at that date become public records. B. The City shall have the right, upon reasonable request, to inspect, review and, subject to the approval of the Consultant, copy any work product. C. In the event that the Consultant shall default on this Agreement, or in the event that this contract shall be terminated prior to its completion as herein provided, the work product of the Consultant, along with a summary of work done to date of default or termination, shall become the property of the City and tender of the work product and summary shall be a prerequisite to final payment under this contract. The summary of work done shall be prepared at no additional cost. 4. Time of performance. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals. 5. Hold harmless agreement. The Consultant shall indemnify and hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from and shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the Consultant’s negligence or breach of any of its obligations under this Agreement; provided that nothing herein shall require a Consultant to indemnify the City against and hold harmless the City from claims, demands or suits based solely upon the conduct of the City, its agents, officers and employees; and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the Consultant’s agents or employees, and (b) the City, its agents, officers and employees, this indemnity provision with respect to (1) claims or suits based upon such negligence (2) the costs to the City of defending such claims and suits shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the Consultant’s negligence or the negligence of the Consultant’s agents or employees. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable sections of the applicable Ethics law, including RCW 42.23, which is the Code of Ethics for regulating contract interest by municipal officers. The Consultant specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the Consultant’s own employees against the City and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the Consultant specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51, RCW. 6. General and professional liability insurance. The Consultant shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of the Agreement, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title 48 RCW. Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the State. Packet Page 218 of 229 B. Commercial general liability and property damage insurance in an aggregate amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, including death and property damage. The per occurrence amount shall not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000). C. Vehicle liability insurance for any automobile used in an amount not less than a one million dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit. D. Professional liability insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000). Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and Professional Liability Insurance secured by the Consultant, the City will be named on all policies as an additional insured. The Consultant shall furnish the City with verification of insurance and endorsements required by the Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The Consultant shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within fourteen days of the execution of this Agreement to the City. No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty days prior notice to the City. The Consultant's professional liability to the City shall be limited to the amount payable under this Agreement or one million dollars ($1,000,000), whichever is the greater, unless modified elsewhere in this Agreement. In no case shall the Consultant's professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. 7. Discrimination prohibited. Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, liability for service in the armed forces of the United States, disability, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, or any other protected class status, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification. 8. Consultant is an independent contractor. The parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee or representative of the Consultant shall be deemed to be an agent, employee or representative of the City for any purpose. Consultant shall be solely responsible for all acts of its agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. 9. City approval of work and relationships. Notwithstanding the Consultant's status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to this Agreement must meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not perform work for any party with respect to any property located within the City of Edmonds or for any project subject to the administrative or quasijudicial review of the City without written notification to the City and the City’s prior written consent. 10. Termination. This being an Agreement for professional services, either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such termination no fewer than ten days in advance of the effective date of said termination. Packet Page 219 of 229 11. Integration. The Agreement between the parties shall consist of this document, the Consultant's proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Consultant’s fee schedule, attached hereto as Exhibit B. These writings constitute the entire Agreement of the parties and shall not be amended except by a writing executed by both parties. In the event of any conflict between this written Agreement and any provision of Exhibits A or B, this Agreement shall control. 12. Changes/Additional Work. The City may engage Consultant to perform services in addition to those listed in this Agreement, and Consultant will be entitled to additional compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be liable for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and compensation is approved in advance in writing and signed by both parties to this Agreement. If conditions are encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of Services, the City understands that a revision to the Scope of Services and fees may be required. Provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to obligate the Consultant to render or the City to pay for services rendered in excess of the Scope of Services in Exhibit A unless or until an amendment to this Agreement is approved in writing by both parties. 13. Standard of Care. Consultant represents that Consultant has the necessary knowledge, skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. Consultant and any persons employed by Consultant shall use their best efforts to perform the work in a professional manner consistent with sound industry practices, in accordance with the schedules herein and in accordance with the usual and customary professional care required for services of the type described in the Scope of Services. 14. Non-waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision. 15. Non-assignable. The services to be provided by the Consultant shall not be assigned or subcontracted without the express written consent of the City. 16. Covenant against contingent fees. The Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award of making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability or, in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. 17. Compliance with laws. The Consultant in the performance of this Agreement shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including regulations for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and accreditation, and licensing of individuals, and any other standards or criteria as described in the Agreement to assure quality of services. Packet Page 220 of 229 The Consultant specifically agrees to pay any applicable business and occupation (B & O) taxes which may be due on account of this Agreement. 18. Notices. Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address: City of Edmonds Attn: Shane Hope 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Notices to the Consultant shall be sent to the following address: Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three days after deposit of written notice in the U.S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed. DATED THIS ______ DAY OF ___________, _____. CITY OF EDMONDS CONSULTANT By By Dave Earling Mayor Its ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Packet Page 221 of 229 STATE OF OREGON ) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared , to me known to be the of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: Packet Page 222 of 229 Exhibit A: Scope of Services  Project: Highway 99 Subarea Planning Project  Prime Contractor: Fregonese Associates Inc.    TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT  Fregonese Associates (FA) uses a hands‐on, inclusive management approach. Frequent, direct and open  communications will keep Edmonds, partner agencies, and team members informed and up‐to‐date.  Close workload monitoring will streamline project resources and result in timely delivery of high‐quality  products. Products will be consistent in tone and style, yet maximize the unique benefits of each firm’s  specialized expertise.     1.1: Consultant Work Plan    At the initiation of the project, the Consultant will work with City of Edmonds staff to develop a detailed  revised work plan by phase, including a task list with responsibilities and deliverables for the entire  process. This work plan will include an understanding of the project and provide an opportunity to  identify the key elements of the scope of work that can be accommodated given the budgetary  resources allocated at that time. It will include tasks for the entire FA Team, needed coordination, and  anticipated review schedules.    1.2: Kick‐Off Meeting and Goal‐Setting    At the outset of the project, the FA Team will meet with City of Edmonds staff and other relevant project  partners to discuss project goals. This meeting will result in a list of project goals which will provide a  framework around which to structure many of the project deliverables. Establishing the project goals  early will help the project team to keep focus throughout the project, to judge the land use and  transportation scenarios and to communicate issues to the public in terms they will find meaningful.   The kick‐off meeting will also serve to finalize elements of the work plan and scope – and thus provide  direction on finalizing the project budget.    Task 1: Deliverables     Kick‐off meeting   Consultant work plan   Summary of project goals     TASK 2: OUTREACH AND EDUCATION  The foundation of a good plan is one that is built on the support of the public, is supported by key  stakeholders and will be adopted by decision makers. The FA Team’s experience across the nation and  specifically in the northwest uniquely positions the team to understand the key issues, and to create  Packet Page 223 of 229 outreach strategies that address the needs of different groups and to engage all participants and  decision makers in a meaningful way that result in an action‐oriented plan. FA uses an interactive  scenario planning approach to engage stakeholders through workshops, interviews and focus groups.     2.1: Community Visioning Workshops    As consultants, the job of the FA Team is not to dictate an answer to a community’s issues and  problems, but to help with ideas and listen to the desires of the community and provide the data,  planning, legislative tools, and other strategies that will enable the City to decide on and achieve a  particular vision. The FA Team will work with the City of Edmonds to design 2 hands‐on community  workshops that allow the public and key stakeholders to express and direct input on goals and  outcomes.    The community workshop will include a game exercise that uses a map of the study area as the “game  board” and icons representing possible development options as game pieces. The workshop will focus  on issues such as redevelopment and reinvestment areas, transportation, infrastructure and public  facilities.    Task 2: Deliverables     Engagement plan   Public workshops (2)   Public engagement summary report    TASK 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS  Before exploring the future, the project team must first be well grounded in the present. Reviewing  existing planning and infrastructure plans for the corridor area and assessing the area through detailed  data analysis are important first steps.    The work completed as part of the existing conditions analysis will feed into the scenario planning  process. Information gathered as part of the existing conditions analysis will enable the FA Team to  develop evaluation measures in collaboration with the City of Edmonds and project partners. The  existing conditions will also help the FA Team set up and calibrate the land use modeling tools, and to  create and evaluate a base case and reference year scenario. This step lays the foundation for  alternative scenario analysis based on input from the market research and transportation analysis.      3.1: Review of Existing Plans    The FA Team will build upon its already extensive knowledge of local planning efforts gleaned from past  work with neighboring jurisdictions by reviewing other existing plan and policy documents relevant to  the study area. The review will include corridor specific studies such as the Highway 99 Enhancement  Project Report and Market Assessment (2004) and the recent SR 99 Technical Memorandum (2015). The  Packet Page 224 of 229 FA Team will also review relevant planning efforts conducted at the city‐wide scale such as the 2015  Comprehensive Plan as well as relevant plans produced by other nearby jurisdictions along SR 99.    3.2: Develop Indicators    Envision Tomorrow allows for scenarios to be evaluated across dozens of potential performance  measures, called indicators.  Identifying the indicators that are related to the project goals will be  important for effective communication. The FA Team will work with City staff to identify which  indicators they want measured and in the process build a database of information that is an essential  component of modeling future scenarios.     3.3: Existing Conditions Mapping    The FA Team will develop a base year land use map for the corridor planning area. The FA Team will  gather and organize preliminary project data and reports (GIS, property, land use, transportation,  demographic, and real estate market information). The FA Team will analyze and compile the data to  summarize initial findings on important issues such as identification of land use patterns, buildable  lands, (re)development opportunities and barriers, economic development and other  cultural/community investments.    Task 3: Deliverables     Summary of relevant policies or findings from existing plans   Summary of chosen indicators and relationship to project goals   Existing conditions maps and GIS data      TASK 4: MARKET ANALYSIS    4.1: Developer Interviews    The FA Team will interview up to 6 members of the local development community (developers, builders,  real estate brokers, lenders, etc.) to get the latest estimates for construction cost and lease rates, as well  as ground truth information gathered for the market analysis. The current market data that is gathered  will allow the FA Team to calibrate the Envision Tomorrow building prototypes to the local market.    Task 4 Deliverables     Powerpoint summarizing developer interviews      Packet Page 225 of 229 TASK 5: MARKET‐FEASIBLE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION  SCENARIOS  Since the company’s formation in 1998, Fregonese Associates has been at the forefront of using  scenarios to help communities make informed decisions. Envision Tomorrow will be calibrated to reflect  development types that are consistent with market research in the corridor planning area. This  approach provides a framework for understanding different land use and transportation impacts and  how well the regulatory framework matches up with market reality.    For a corridor like Highway 99, understanding the connection between transportation and land use is  critical. Certain land uses, such as vertical mixed‐use, are unlikely to occur without significant new  pedestrian and bicycle improvements.    Scenarios will then be evaluated using the performance indicators established in Task 3.2. These  scenario results will form the basis of the materials developed and used to get feedback at the open  house.    5.1: Develop Corridor Prototype Library    Using data collected as part of the market analysis, the Consultant will develop a library of up to 20  prototype buildings using Envision Tomorrow’s Prototype Builder tool. These prototypes can include  mixed‐use, residential, commercial, and industrial buildings and will become the building blocks of the  scenarios. The detailed building library will allow the FA Team to track dozens of potentially important  attributes of the scenarios, such as physical form parameters, financial characteristics, energy  consumption, tax revenue generation, etc. These buildings will be refined based on input from City staff  and should reflect both existing conditions in the corridor as well as aspirational building types that  meet project goals but may not yet be constructed along Highway 99.    5.2: Design Land Use and Transportation Scenarios    Working closely with City staff and using the results of the public workshops, the FA Team will develop a  series of GIS‐based land use/transportation alternative scenarios to understand the potential course of  “virtual futures” using the open source Envision Tomorrow suite of planning tools. These futures could  include:     Continuation of current trends   Comprehensive plan build‐out   Multimodal emphasis, etc.     These scenarios will be market‐feasible and take into account near term achievable rents and  construction costs in the corridor. They will respond to different policy options and allow the City and  the public to understand the trade‐offs associated with different development and infrastructure  investments in the corridor.    Task 5 Deliverables     Locally‐calibrated building prototype library  Packet Page 226 of 229  Scenario summary memorandum       TASK 6: PREPARATION FOR PLANNED ACTION EIS  The FA Team understands that a high priority of this project is to prepare a Planned Action EIS for the  subarea plan to ensure that environmental impacts are considered and mitigated holistically. Given the  existing budget, this phase will only include preliminary steps, identified in Task 6.1 below.  The project  kick‐off meeting will provide the direction needed to finalize the exact outcomes needed, and the  required effort and budget.    6.1: EIS Scoping    Using the outcomes of the market‐feasible land use and transportation scenarios as the basis for the  planned action alternatives, the FA Team will prepare a DS and Scoping Notice, organize and facilitate a  public scoping meeting, and prepare a scoping report that documents the scoping process and  summarizes all scoping comments. The FA Team recommends that the scoping meeting be integrated  with public outreach for the subarea plan. The FA Team has assumed that key environmental issues to  be addressed in the EIS are likely to include land use, plans and policies, aesthetics, transportation, and  public services/utilities.    Task 6 Deliverables     DS and Scoping Notice      TASK 7: SUB‐ AREA DRAFT PLAN  The FA Team understand that Edmonds desires to have a plan that is technically sound, reflects  multimodal design principles and policies, is graphically pleasing, and is easy to understand and navigate  by the diverse group of stakeholders. The FA Team will work with City staff to organize elements of the  subarea plan which will include:    7.1: Preferred Strategy    After a range of possible future alternatives are evaluated and input has been received at the open  house and the project team will create a preferred strategy. The specifics of the strategy could be a  combination of one or more of the alternatives already tested as well as any new or refined ideas that  have emerged. A full evaluation of the strategy performance will be generated with associated  indicators. The specific land use and transportation strategies, actions, policies and investments will be  detailed in the Action Plan, and organized into short, medium and long term action items.    7.2: Action Plan    Once a preferred strategy has been developed, the roadmap for implementing the vision can be  detailed. A successful action plan details specific actions that need to be taken, who is responsible and  Packet Page 227 of 229 when the actions should be taken. The action plan will include items that can be implemented  immediately such as development standard changes, as well as medium or long term items, such as a  prioritized list of capital investments, which may include additional pedestrian crossings or widened  sidewalks.    7.3: Development Standards    The audit of current development codes as well as the outcomes of the preferred scenario process will  provide specific direction on desired land uses. This direction will be formulated into specific  recommended changes to zoning and development standards. The anticipated changes could range  from allowing additional uses, site design standards or parking requirements. While the process will not  result in a comprehensive zoning overhaul, the FA Team will identify the major code‐related barriers to  implementing the vision and recommend alternative standards grounded in both experience and market  feasibility.     7.4: Capital Improvements    In addition to development standards and zoning recommendations, the action plan will include a  matrix of potential capital improvement projects along with preliminary costing and relevant partner  agencies. These projects will have clear ties to recommendations from the preferred strategy and clearly  demonstrate their potential for affecting transformative change within the corridor.    Task 7 Deliverables     Draft subarea plan      TASK 8: FINAL SUB‐AREA PLAN  Once reviewed by City Staff and project stakeholders, the FA Team will make final revisions and provide  a final Subarea Plan in electronic format as well as a technical appendix documenting all project  assumptions.    Task 8 Deliverables     Final subarea plan      Packet Page 228 of 229 Exhibit B: Fee Schedule City of Edmonds: Highway 99 Sub-area Planning Project TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 4,995$ 1.1: Consultant Work Plan 1.2: Kick-Off Meeting and Goal-Setting TASK 2: OUTREACH AND EDUCATION 10,300$ 2.1: Community Visioning Workshops TASK 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND MAPPING 14,060$ 3.1: Review of Existing Plans 3.2: Develop Indicators 3.3: Existing Conditions Mapping TASK 4: MARKET ANALYSIS 3,280$ 4.1: Developer Interviews TASK 5: LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS 11,780$ 5.1: Develop Corridor Prototype Library 5.2: Design Land Use and Transportation Scenarios TASK 6: SEPA AND PLAN ACTION DUE DILLIGENCE 2,580$ 6.1: EIS Scoping TASK 7: SUB-AREA DRAFT PLAN 37,850$ 7.1: Preferred Strategy 7.2: Action Plan 7.3: Development Standards 7.4: Capital Improvements TASK 8: FINAL SUB-AREA PLAN 13,555$ 8.1: Final Sub-Area Plan Tasks Total 98,400$ Subtotal 98,400$ Expenses: Travel, Materials, and Data Acquisition 1,600$ Total 100,000$ Total Budget Packet Page 229 of 229