Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2019-06-11 City Council - Full Agenda-2373
u� Of EYMo�o Agenda .' Edmonds City Council n Hy° COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 JUNE 11, 2019, 7:00 PM COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS ARE WORK SESSIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF. THE MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC BUT ARE NOT PUBLIC HEARINGS; PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOT TAKEN AT COMMITTEE MEETINGS. THE COMMITTEES MEET CONCURRENTLY IN SEPARATE ROOMS AS INDICATED BELOW. PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE (COUNCIL CHAMBER) 1. ECC 5.32 and 5.05.060; Park Rules and Dog Rules (15 min) 2. Presentation of a Local Agency Agreement for construction management, material testing and inspection services for the 84th Ave Overlay (10 min) 3. Utility Rate Increase & future adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance (20 min) 4. Presentation of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace for aquatic vegetation removal in Lake Ballinger (10 min) 5. Presentation of an Intergovernmental Services Agreement with the Snohomish County, for development of an on -going water quality monitoring program for Lake Ballinger (10 min) 6. Lynnwood Mazda Pedestrian Easement (10 min) 7. Larsen Short Plat - 10-ft Street ROW Dedication along 75th PI W and Retaining Wall Maintenance Easement along 72nd Ave W (10 min) 8. Wassall Pedestrian Easement at the NE corner of 639 2nd Ave (10 min) 9. 10-ft Sanitary Sewer Easement along the west property boundary of 625 Alder Street (10 min) 10. Presentation of a Supplemental Agreement with Parametrix for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector (30 min) FINANCE COMMITTEE (JURY MEETING ROOM) 1. Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Discussion (15 min) 2. Edmonds Public Facilities District Financial Report (15 min) 3. Civic Field Debt Service Options Discussion (25 min) 4. Washington State Auditor's Office Financial Intelligence Tool (10 min) 5. Utility Rate Increase & future adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance (20 min) 6. April 2019 Monthly Financial Report (10 min) PLANNING, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE (POLICE TRAINING ROOM) 1. Indigenous Peoples Land Acknowledgment for Public Meetings (10 min) 2. Draft Urban Forest Management Plan (20 min) Edmonds City Council Agenda June 11, 2019 Page 1 1.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 ECC 5.32 and 5.05.060; Park Rules and Dog Rules Staff Lead: Carrie Hite Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Preparer: Carrie Hite Background/History Staff took recommended changes to the Planning Board in March. Based on feedback, staff made a few suggested changes and are bringing these forward to the City Council for consideration. Staff Recommendation Discuss proposed changes and give staff guidance. Narrative There are several recommended changes to the Park rules that are being requested. These will assist in operating parks for the safety of all. The changes include the following: 1. Adding a chapter to prohibit smoking/vaping in parks. 2. Add a chapter to prohibit feeding wildlife on waterfront beaches. 3. Changing park hours to read " closed from sunset to sunrise" . 4. Clarifying chapter 5.32.030 about the allowance motor vehicles in parks. 5. Clarifying 5.32.040 to be consistent with our practice. 6. A few smaller housekeeping items. In addition to these recommended changes to the Park rules, staff are also recommending changes to chapter 5.05.060 Dogs on public grounds as it relates to parks. Currently, if someone with a dog wants to follow the rules, they would need to consult the City code to determine where they can walk their dog. Staff are recommending that we allow dogs in all parks, on leash, with the exception of playfields, beaches, playgrounds, the spray ground and school grounds. Currently, the school district is exploring their policy and will work with the City if they would like this amended. The Parks department is prepared to install dog waste stations at all of our parks and encourage dog walkers to pick up after their pets. Attached are strikeout versions for both ECC 5.32 and 5.05.060 as it relates to recommended changes. Attachments: Dogs on Public Grounds strike and edit 6.5.19 ch Park Regulations strike version 6.5.19 ch Packet Pg. 2 5.05.060 Dogs on public grounds. A. It shall be unlawful for an owner to allow any dog to stray and/or enter with or without a leash or other means of restraint upon any school ground, playfield, playground, sprayground p or beach, waterfront ar the f „bl pr-opet4y. IgHT Wf MOT 6. The southeast wooded area of City Park; and • BQ All degs Dogs are permitted in city parks, waterfront and on other public property not listed in subsection (A) of this section, and the areas designated in stibseetion (B) of this seetien shall be on a leash and in the owners control at all times. Dovs are permitted offleash at the off leash area south of Marina Beach Park. Packet Pg. 3 CD. Nothing herein shall be determined to require the posting of notices to exclude animals; provided, however, that such postings may be undertaken at the discretion of the director meager of parks and recreation. DE. The regulations under ECC 5.05.070 relating to animal waste and the removal and proper disposal of said waste will be strictly enforced. Packet Pg. 4 5.32.010 Park closing hours. All parks shall be closed from sunset to sunrise between the ,,eiffs of 1 0:l1l1 ,n 6:00 .,.m. every day unless otherwise posted by the city park and recreation department. It is unlawful for any person to loiter on, remain in, or otherwise be on said premises between the stated hours unless written permission is granted by the mayor, a department head a police officer or firefighter of the city. 5.32.030 Motor vehicles prohibited from city parks. It is unlawful to operate motor vehicles of every kind and description, whether licensed or unlicensed, speeifiea'll including but not limited to two "eele,a motor vehicles such as cars, mini -bikes, motorcycles_, and trailbikes, and battery operated vehicles in or on any park, except where otherwise noticed, with the exception of Segway's being allowed along the waterfront marine walkway. The director of parks and recreation is authorized to post a notice or notices identifying arking areas, roadways, entrances and exits for motor vehicles to and within said parks which posted areas, and only said areas, shall be open for motor vehicular purposes. The owner and/or operator of any motor vehicle found within or on any said public park, other than in the areas posted as hereinabove provided is guilty of a misdemeanor. 5.32.040 Drinking intoxicants or use of illegal drugs in public parks prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to consume any intoxicating liquor or use any illegal drugs as defined by ECC 5.19.010, within any public park, beach or playground within the city of Edmonds whether owned by, leased or otherwise under the supervision of the city, unless authorized by pecial Event Permit. 5.32.045 Smoking and vaping in public parks prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to smoke or light cigarettes, cigars, tobacco or other smoking material, or to use electronic cigarettes or vaping devices within city parks. The director of parks and recreation shall post signs in appropriate locations prohibiting smokingand vaping in the cit'sparks. 5.32.050 Horses and similar animals. Unless otherwise directed by the director of parks and recreation as set forth in ECC 5.05.150, it is unlawful for any person to ride, lead or otherwise permit any horse, ems, mule, donkey, burro, pig and/or bovine animal to be within or on any park unless utilized for ADA purposes. Packet Pg. 5 5.32.100 Fishing pier regulations. It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any of the following regulations on the Edmonds public fishing pier at the Edmonds boat harbor adjacent to Dayton Beach Park: A. No person shall permit any animal to enter or remain on the fishing pier; provided, however, that this section shall not apply to service animals �eeig eye dogs that are being used by blind persons needing an accommodation for the purpose of aiding them going from place to place. B. No person shall use or operate any wheeled vehicle upon the fishing pier, including but not limited to any motor vehicle, bicycle, roller skatesz--ef skateboard, or Segway; provided, however, this section shall not apply to authorized police, fire and public works vehicles, wheelchairs being used by handicapped persons and carriages/strollers for children. eaffi ges f r marts. C. No person shall cast fishing tackle of any kind or description, including but not limited to, hooks, lines and/or sinkers, from the fishing pier at any location where signs are posted to prohibit such casting. 5.32.106 Feeding wildlife on city beaches prohibited. No person shall intentionally feed, attract, or artificially sustain wildlife on city beaches. The feeding of indigenous wildlife is prohibited in all city beach areas unless otherwise posted. This section does not apply to authorized feeding_ programs established with the Washington state department of fish and wildlife. Packet Pg. 6 1.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Presentation of a Local Agency Agreement for construction management, material testing and inspection services for the 84th Ave Overlay Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Place this item on a future consent agenda for approval, if the negotiated consultant fee is less than $137,200. Narrative The project consists of a full -width grind and a pavement overlay along 84th Ave from 220th Street to 212th Street. This project also includes upgrading all non -compliant ADA curb ramps, as well as the replacement of a failing storm line between 216`" and 2201" Streets. Solar -powered pedestrian -actuated beacons will be installed at the crosswalk directly in front of the school. The City has obtained a $691,200 federal grant through the Puget Sound Regional Council to supplement design and construction. Staff solicited Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from interested parties through the Everett Herald and the Daily Journal of Commerce. Four firms responded: Pacific CM WH Pacific Vanir Magnan Construction Services. During qualifications review, which will evaluate project approach, construction management experience, inspection / administrative experience, and past project references and performance, staff will select the best candidate and request a scope and fee proposal for subsequent negotiation for the noted engineering services. The City's preliminary estimate for these services is $137,200. Attachments: Vicinity Map Packet Pg. 7 8 4-211�hl A-r-\v-/enue Overlay From 2121�h to 22Wh Streets WIT 0 KV) FiA rrIIIj zi 4 hab - i+sl'�T + • y _ Project Limits Packet Pg. 8 1.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Utility Rate Increase & future adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Preparation of a Utility Rate Ordinance for approval in a future council meeting. Narrative The City of Edmonds operates a combined utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions. The City received the draft combined utility rate study from its consultant, the FCS Group. The findings show increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates. This funding will help address rising costs including but not limited to: inflation and the rising maintenance and operations costs, wholesale cost increases for potable water from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District, the replacement of aging and failing water/sewer/storm infrastructure as part of the annual replacement projects and upcoming larger capital projects. The rate increases recommended and proposed by staff will make it so that the City will only need to acquire bonds for some of the larger upcoming capital projects. The cost for annual maintenance and replacement projects will be rate funded, thereby resulting in considerable future savings to the City. Attachments: Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v2 - Infl AWWD Inc Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v2 Edmonds DRAFT Stormwater Rate Model v2 Packet Pg. 9 1.3.a City of Edmonds Water Rate & GFC Model ,= Summary Total Capital Projects $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Grants and Developer Contributions $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ - PWTF Loan Proceeds Revenue Bond Proceeds - - Use of Capital Fund Balance 4,697,000 2,553,456 2,941,994 3,727,356 3,895,916 4,051,752 4,007,305 4,167,597 4,920,017 3,974,671 4,133,658 Direct Rate Funding Total Funding Sources $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Revenues Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates Non -Rate Revenues Total Revenues Expenses Cash O&M Expenses [1] Debt Service System Reinvestment Rate Funded CIP Total Expenses Annual Rate Adjustment Rate Increases Dictated by., Rate Revenues After Rate Increase Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase Coverage After Rate Increases $ 8,674,361 $ 8,725,504 $ 8,776,860 $ 8,828,564 $ 8,880,483 $ 8,932,939 $ 8,985,426 $ 9,038,480 $ 9,091,726 $ 9,145,167 $ 9,199,177 1,538,298 1,371,765 939,874 945,409 951,013 956,689 962,190 967,755 973,261 979,201 985,089 $10,212,658 $ 10,097,269 $ 9,716,734 $ 9,773,973 $ 9,831,496 $ 9,889,628 $ 9,947,616 $ 10,006,234 $ 10,064,987 $ 10,124,368 $ 10,184,267 $ 6,198,021 $ 6,252,103 $ 6,171,248 $ 6,343,382 $ 6,523,277 $ 6,711,684 $ 6,908,836 $ 7,115,793 $ 7,332,907 $ 7,561,056 $ 7,801,241 1,256, 540 1,258,950 1,254,358 1,254,742 1,275,378 1,270,093 1,253,081 1,243,796 1,253,179 1,249,168 1,250,620 2,400,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,800,000 2,950,000 3,100,000 3,250,000 3,400,000 3,500,000 3,650,000 3,800,000 $ 9,854,561 $ 10,011,053 $ 10,025,605 $ 10,398,124 $ 10,748,656 $ 11,081,777 $ 11,411,916 $ 11,759,589 $ 12,086,087 $ 12,460,224 $ 12,851,861 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Analysis $ 8,674,361 $ 8,987,269 $ 9,311,371 $ 9,647,210 $ 9,995,062 $ 10,355,725 $ 10,729,069 $ 11,116,190 $ 11,517,127 $ 11,932,368 $ 12,338,595 $ 358,098 $ 301,626 $ 145,308 $ 71,461 $ 29,909 $ 16,807 $ 17,291 $ 12,097 $ 39,787 $ 32,458 3.72 3.72 3.71 3.85 3.90 4.05 4.15 4.32 4.41 4.55 4.68 )perating Fund $ 1,058,098 $ 845,870 $ 870,175 $ 897,621 $ 926,339 $ 943,146 $ 960,437 $ 972,533 $ 1,012,320 $ 1,044,778 $ 1,044,778 ;apital Fund 3,306,123 4,247,225 4,521,420 4,141,082 3,694,020 3,240,805 2,971,732 2,696,180 1,764,177 1,913,642 2,064,216 )ebt Reserve Fund 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 Total $ 5,564,828 $ 6,293,703 $ 6,592,202 $ 6,239,310 $ 5,820,967 $ 5,384,559 $ 5,132,776 $ 4,869,321 $ 3,977,104 $ 4,159,028 $ 4,309,601 ;ombinedMinimum Target Balance $ 1,869,210 $ 1,889,729 $ 1,907,958 $ 1,928,542 $ 1,950,081 $ 1,972,663 $ 1,996,322 $ 2,021,183 $ Z03ZO52 $ 2,034,414 $ 2,034,487 Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v - (425) 867-1802 Packet Pg. 10 1.3.b City of Edmonds Water Rate & GFC Model ,= Summary Total Capital Projects $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Grants and Developer Contributions $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ - PWTF Loan Proceeds Revenue Bond Proceeds - - Use of Capital Fund Balance 4,697,000 2,553,456 2,941,994 3,727,356 3,895,916 4,051,752 4,007,305 4,167,597 4,920,017 3,974,671 4,133,658 Direct Rate Funding Total Funding Sources $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Revenues Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates Non -Rate Revenues Total Revenues Expenses Cash O&M Expenses [1] Debt Service System Reinvestment Rate Funded CIP Total Expenses Annual Rate Adjustment Rate Increases Dictated by., Rate Revenues After Rate Increase Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase Coverage After Rate Increases $ 8,674,361 $ 8,725,504 $ 8,776,860 $ 8,828,564 $ 8,880,483 $ 8,932,939 $ 8,985,426 $ 9,038,480 $ 9,091,726 $ 9,145,167 $ 9,199,177 1,538,298 1,371,765 940,642 946,060 951,995 957,496 963,449 969,424 975,351 980,707 986,834 $10,212,658 $ 10,097,269 $ 9,717,502 $ 9,774,624 $ 9,832,478 $ 9,890,435 $ 9,948,876 $ 10,007,903 $ 10,067,077 $ 10,125,874 $ 10,186,011 $ 6,198,021 $ 6,563,441 $ 6,611,060 $ 6,852,790 $ 7,116,241 $ 7,378,191 $ 7,653,880 $ 7,944,657 $ 8,251,180 $ 8,574,646 $ 8,916,397 1,256, 540 1,258,950 1,254,358 1,254,742 1,275,378 1,270,093 1,253,081 1,243,796 1,253,179 1,249,168 1,250,620 2,400,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,800,000 3,050,000 3,200,000 3,400,000 3,600,000 3,821,799 3,974,671 4,133,658 $ 9,854,561 $ 10,322,390 $ 10,465,417 $ 10,907,532 $ 11,441,620 $ 11,848,284 $ 12,306,960 $ 12,788,453 $ 13,326,158 $ 13,798,485 $ 14,300,675 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Analysis $ 8,674,361 $ 9,161,779 $ 9,676,488 $ 10,220,166 $ 10,794,283 $ 11,292,365 $ 11,813,064 $ 12,358,126 $ 12,928,165 $ 13,524,323 $ 14,041,610 $ 358,098 $ 133,894 $ 16,508 $ 49,550 $ 17,034 $ 46,980 $ 44,588 $ 40,186 $ 780 $ 48,402 3.72 3.60 3.64 3.87 4.03 4.23 4.37 4.60 4.75 4.96 5.09 )perating Fund $ 1,058,098 $ 897,049 $ 913,556 $ 963,106 $ 980,140 $ 1,027,119 $ 1,071,707 $ 1,111,894 $ 1,112,673 $ 1,161,075 $ 1,161,075 ;apital Fund 3,306,123 4,028,315 4,178,223 3,748,722 3,394,584 3,036,877 2,914,745 2,838,338 2,230,266 2,711,394 3,207,591 )ebt Reserve Fund 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 Total $ 5,564,828 $ 6,125,971 $ 6,292,387 $ 5,912,436 $ 5,575,331 $ 5,264,604 $ 5,187,060 $ 5,150,839 $ 4,543,547 $ 5,073,076 $ 5,569,274 ;ombinedMinimum Target Balance $ 1,869,210 $ 1,928,114 $ 1,962,181 $ 1,991,346 $ 2,023,186 $ 2,054,835 $ 2,088,177 $ 2,123,372 $ 2,145,264 $ 2,159,378 $ 2,171,972 Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Wa (425) 867-1802 Packet Pg. 11 1.3.c r r: V 'f. City of Edmonds Stormwater Rate & GFC Model Revenue Requirement Analysis Expenses Cash Operating Expenses $ 2,726,795 $ 2,830,315 $ 2,919,099 $ 3,013,050 $ 3,112,595 $ 3,218,202 $ 3,330,380 $ 3,449,693 $ 3,576,752 $ 3,712,232 $ 3,856870 Debt Service 756,109 756,991 755,466 753,654 758,532 756,365 723,044 722,625 596,427 601,012 600:619 System Reinvestment 1,250,000 1,750,000 2,100,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,750,000 2,900,000 3,050,000 3,300,000 3,450,000 3,600,000 Rate -Funded CIP - - - - - - - - - - - Additions to Meet Minimum Operating Fund Balance - - - Total $ 4,732,904 $ 5,337,306 $ 5,774,565 $ 6,266,704 $ 6,471,127 $ 6,724,567 $ 6,953,425 $ 7,222,318 $ 7,473,179 $ 7,763,244 $ 8,057,489 Revenues Rate Revenue $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 City Utility Tax Revenue 446,277 447,392 448,511 449,632 450,756 451,883 453,013 454,145 455,281 456,419 457,560 Other Revenue 83,944 84,245 79,470 79,686 79,748 80,120 80,213 80,540 80,658 80,996 81,138 Total $ 4.992.988 $ 5.005.562 $ 5.013.089 $ 5.025.640 $ 5.038.067 $ 5.050.835 $ 5.063.354 $ 5.076.139 $ 5.088.746 $ 5.101.605 $ 5.114,298 Expenses Cash Operating Expenses (Excluding City Taxes) Revenue Bond Debt Service Additional Coverage Required Total Revenues Rate Revenue (Excluding City Taxes) GFC Revenue Other Revenue Interest Earnings Total $ 2,280,519 $ 2,382,922 $ 2,470,588 $ 2,563,418 $ 2,661,839 $ 2,766,318 $ 2,877,368 $ 2,995,547 $ 3,121,471 $ 3,255,813 $ 3,399,310 565,078 564,642 563,675 562,546 566,588 565,416 563,802 563,062 563,248 567,833 567,441 $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 43,240 43,348 43,457 43,565 43,674 43,783 43,893 44,002 44,112 44,223 44,333 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 Prepared by FCS GROUP (425)867-1802 Edmonds DRAFT Storm Packet Pg. 12 r r: V 'f. City of Edmonds Stormwater Rate & GFC Model Revenue Requirement Analysis to 4- 0 - • 020 r 0 Sufficienc Test Drivin the Deficienc Y 9 Y None Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash +, CL Maximum Deficiency From Tests $ (260,084) $ 331,744 $ 761,476 $ 1,241,065 $ 1,433,060 $ 1,673,732 $ 1,890,071 $ 2,146,179 $ 2,384,433 $ 2,661,639 $ 2,943,191 0 less: Net Revenue From Prior Rate Increases (426,085) (894,880) (1,410,562) (1,651,405) (1,902,960) (2,165,685) (2,440,055) (2,726,569) (3,025,745) 0 Net Revenue Deficiency $ (260,084) $ 331,744 $ 335,390 $ 346,185 $ 22,498 $ 22,327 $ (12,890) $ (19,505) $ (55,622) $ (64,930) $ (82,554) 0 Plus: Adjustment for Taxes (33,796) 43,108 98,949 161,268 186,217 217,491 245,602 278,882 309,842 345,863 382,449 i Total Revenue r- :r r r: :r r3+ 7 05 d Rate Revenue at Existing/Adopted Rates $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 N Revenues from Prior Rate Increases - - 426,085 894,880 1,410,562 1,651,405 1,902,960 2,165,685 2,440,055 2,726,569 3,025745 Rate Revenue Before Current Year Rate Increase $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,911,194 $ 5,391,202 $ 5,918,124 $ 6,170,237 $ 6,433,089 $ 6,707,138 $ 6,992,862 $ 7,290,758 $ 7,601:345 d Required Annual Rate Increase -6.59% 8.38% 8.84% 9.41 % 3.53% 3.89% 3.62% 3.87% 3.64% 3.85% 3.95% V C Number of Months New Rates Will Be In Effect 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 ■ 12 12 41 Info: Percentage Increase to Generate Required Revenue -6.59% 8.38% 8.84% 9.41% 3.53% 3.89% 3.62% 3.87% 3.64% 3.85% 3.95% M IX Policy Induced Rate Increases 0.00% 9.50% 9.50% 9.50% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% ANNUAL RATE INCREASE 0.00% 9.50% 9.50% 9.50% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 3.95% CUMULATIVE RATE INCREASE 0.00% 9.50% 19.90% 31.29% 36.54% 42.01 % 47.69% 53.59% 59.74% 66.13% 72.68% impacts or Rate increases Z1116 zfzllr rizz zilizi ZTZ4r r rZ;Ilzs Rate Revenues After Rate Increase $ 4,462,767 $ 4,898,947 $ 5,377,757 $ 5,903,366 $ 6,154,849 $ 6,417,046 $ 6,690,412 $ 6,975,424 $ 7,272,577 $ 7,582,389 $ 7,901,239 Full Year Rate Revenues After Rate Increase 4,462,767 4,898,947 5,377,757 5,903,366 6,154,849 6,417,046 6,690,412 6,975,424 7,272,577 7,582,389 7,901,239 Additional Taxes Due to Rate Increases City Utility Taxes $ - $ 42,502 $ 89,265 $ 140,704 $ 164,729 $ 189,821 $ 216,028 $ 243,397 $ 271,977 $ 301,820 $ 332,564 Excise Taxes 6,375 13,390 21,106 24,709 28,473 32,404 36,510 40,797 45,273 49,885 Total $ - $ 48,878 $ 102,655 $ 161,810 $ 189,438 $ 218,295 $ 248,433 $ 279,907 $ 312,774 $ 347,093 $ 382,449 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase $ 260,084 $ 44,401 $ 28,519 $ 4,170 $ 24,789 $ 6,188 $ 21,781 $ 7,884 $ 22,563 $ 9,467 '. Coverage After Rate Increase 4.15 4.72 5.38 6.14 6.36 6.64 6.94 7.26 7.58 7.85 8.19 Operating Reserve Ending Balance $ 710,084 $ 391,713 $ 406,124 $ 410,294 $ 435,083 $ 441,270 $ 463,051 $ 470,935 $ 493,498 $ 502,965 $ 502,965 Operating Reserve Target Balance $ 281,160 $ 293,785 $ 304,593 $ 316,038 $ 328,172 $ 341,053 $ 354,744 $ 369,314 $ 384,839 $ 401,402 $ 419,093 # of Days of Cash Operating Expenses 114 Days 60 Days 60 Days 58 Days 60 Days 58 Days 59 Days 57 Days 58 Days 56 Days 54 Days Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Storm (425) 867-1802 Packet Pg. 13 1.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Presentation of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace for aquatic vegetation removal in Lake Ballinger Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On July 1, 2008, and September 7, 2010, Council approved a similar Interlocal Agreement (ILA) to be implemented by the appointed City representative to the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum. Both of these ILAs were one year agreements. The ILA approved in 2010 for calendar year 2011 included funding for a Federal lobbyist approved by City Council. On January 23, 2012, Council approved a version of this ILA with an end date of December 31, 2013 that included $1,600 to pay for Edmonds' portion of the Forum administration costs but did not include a $10,000 contribution toward the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On April 3, 2012, Council approved this ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On January 21, 2014, Council approved the First Amendment to the ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On January 26, 2016, Council approved the Second Amendment to the ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On January 16, 2018, Council approved the Third Amendment to the ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the June 18, 2019, consent agenda for Council approval. Narrative Through staff work with the Lake Ballinger Forum, invasive vegetation was identified in 2017. Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace staff have since worked with lakeside residents and the Department of Ecology to fund, develop, and receive Ecology approval for an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan for Lake Ballinger. Development of the plan was grant funded and matched with in -kind staff and equipment time rather than cash. The forum contracted with Tetra Tech to have the plan developed; Dr. Harry Gibbons, who authored the plan, is a nationally recognized expert in the field of aquatic Packet Pg. 14 1.4 vegetation management who co-authored Ecology's guidance document for developing these types of plans. The plan began with a survey of the current lake vegetation by boat before moving into selecting appropriate treatment methods. Eurasian milfoil, curly leaf pondweed, and fragrant water lily were identified as invasive species in Lake Ballinger. Eurasian milfoil is a Class B noxious weed and the fragrant water lily is a Class C noxious weed. The infestations were generally limited to the shallower depth of the lake; the area of concern is not the entire lake but generally the ring around the edge of the lake and the island in the middle where depth remain less than 12-feet or so. It was estimated that roughly 18 of the 106 acres lake is infested and the density in those areas are 80-90%. The aquatic vegetation management plan includes a combination of chemical and physical treatment. The development plan and approval process included several public meetings (in addition to regular meetings for the Lake Ballinger Forum), newspaper postings and notices, and the information about the treatment has been written up in abbreviated articles in both the Edmonds Beacon and myedmondsnews.com. Lakeside owners, to include the Nile golf course, have been heavily involved in the process and have also been given opportunity to address their concern for the said chemical treatment. Residents are given option to opt out of treatment for their property. Having run the required process and public participation, staff are now ready to proceed with application of the herbicide treatment. The approved plan calls for the application of two separate herbicides to target the various species of plants and the application is spread over a 5-year period to ensure effectiveness and manage impacts. Fluridone will be used to target the water lilies and is only proposed to be applied to 25% of the infestation area. Florpyrauxifen-benzyl (aka ProcellaCOR) will be used to target the milfoil and pondweed and will be applied to 50% of the infestation area. Generally, the first year's application will be along the north and north-east shorelines, in areas which are predominately public or part of the golf course. This will allow citizens to observe the first year application ahead of needing to decide if they will opt out of treatment on their own property. The lily treatment has to be throttled back to 25% due to a phosphorus release which is associated with dying lilies; the treatment must be monitored to avoid an algae bloom. The plan includes physical treatment of areas by individual residents as well. The proposal includes a workshop to teach residents the proper method of hand removal to avoid fragmentation and spread of the milfoil and for installing burlap barriers to hinder re -growth. These elements won't change in the amended plan. The application of the herbicide and the resident education workshops will be grant funded through Ecology. City matching contributions are limited to staff and equipment time spent on the project. At the request of Mountlake Terrace legal counsel, a separate ILA was developed just for the application of the herbicide treatment. The need arose from a concern about hiring a contractor to cross jurisdictional lines. Previous work under the existing Forum ILA only required an agency to hire a contractor to do physical work within its own jurisdiction. Attachments: ILA for Lake Ballinger Aquatic Weed Control Packet Pg. 15 1.4.a INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS TO CONTROL AQUATIC NOXIOUS WEEDS IN LAKE BALLINGER This Agreement is created under the authority of Chapter 39.34 RCW of the Interlocal Cooperation Act ("Agreement") and is entered by and between the City of Edmonds and the City of Mountlake Terrace, both municipal corporations under the laws of the State of Washington (individually "Party" and collectively "Parties"), hereafter referred to as "Edmonds" and "Mountlake Terrace" respectively. WHEREAS, Mountlake Terrace and Edmonds have in the past cooperatively shared responsibility for water resource issues in Lake Ballinger in joint ownership of the lake; and WHEREAS, Mountlake Terrace and Edmonds currently participate as member jurisdictions of the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Forum along with Lake Forest Park, to collectively solve issues within the greater Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek watershed; and WHEREAS, in 2017, lake residents and lake users requested that the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Forum take action to address the problem of the excessive growth of invasive aquatic plants in Lake Ballinger; and WHEREAS, a June 2018 aquatic plant survey indicated that mats of invasive weeds including Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), Fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata), and Curly leaf pondweed (Potamogeton crispus) now cover at least 17 acres of Lake Ballinger, with 80-90% nearshore area coverage. Snohomish County has designated these plants as Class B (Eurasian watermilfoil) and Class C noxious weeds (Fragrant waterlily and Curly leaf pondweed) in Washington State; and WHEREAS, these mat -forming aquatic weeds are negatively affecting the water quality of the lake, by decreasing dissolved oxygen and increasing seasonal phosphorous loading. Low oxygen levels and high phosphorous levels are known water quality issues in Lake Ballinger, having caused lake algae blooms in the past; and WHEREAS, Lake Ballinger residents and lake users and have reported experiencing significant impacts to lake recreational uses (boating, swimming, and fishing) from aquatic noxious weeds, including the risk of entanglement; and WHEREAS, the updated and approved Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Forum Capital Improvement Plan developed in 2018 calls for an invasive aquatic weed control project to be jointly undertaken by Mountlake Terrace and Edmonds; and Packet Pg. 16 1.4.a Interlocal Agreement to Control Aquatic Noxious Weeds in Lake Ballinger Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, in 2018-2019, a citizen steering committee composed of lake residents, lake users, city staff, the Nile Golf Course, and an experienced limnologist evaluated the extent of the problem, weighed various solutions, and developed an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan ("Plan") for Lake Ballinger which was reviewed and approved by the Washington Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, Mountlake Terrace has been awarded a two-year grant from the Washington Department of Ecology to fund the use of herbicides and public education to control invasive aquatic weeds in Lake Ballinger as per the approved Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree to the following: 1. Purpose. By entering into this Agreement, the Parties intend to set forth roles and responsibilities for the application of aquatic herbicides in jointly owned Lake Ballinger. 2. Term. This Agreement shall take effect on the day of , 2019 ("Effective Date"), and unless terminated in accordance with Section 3, below, shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2024. This Agreement may be renewed by mutual written agreement for two consecutive five (5) year periods. Ninety (90) days prior to the end of calendar year 2024 and prior to the end of each renewal period thereafter, each Party shall provide written notice of its intent to renew this Agreement. 3. Termination. Either Party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause by providing the other Party with thirty (30) days' written notice of its intent to terminate. Termination or expiration shall not alter the Parties' payment obligations for services already rendered, or for the normal and reasonable costs incurred in terminating and closing out the work, and shall not alter the Parties' respective obligations under Section 6 of this Agreement. 4. Scope. Edmonds shall consent and permit a licensed and qualified aquatic herbicide applicator contracted by Mountlake Terrace to apply herbicides to control invasive weeds in Lake Ballinger, including portions of the lake within the Edmonds city limits. 4.1 Mountlake Terrace agrees and shall: A. Apply for a permit through the Washington Department of Ecology ("Ecology") and obtain an approved Aquatic Plant and Algae Management Permit. B. Through the approved notification process for this permit by the Department of Ecology, notify Lake Ballinger lakeshore residents of the Packet Pg. 17 1.4.a Interlocal Agreement to Control Aquatic Noxious Weeds in Lake Ballinger Page 3 of 6 herbicide application through public notifications, including a public meeting, direct mailings to Lake Ballinger shore residents no less than ten (10) days prior to and no more than forty-two (42) days prior to the herbicide applications, and posting on all lakeshore property two (2) days prior to herbicide application. The notifications will be completed by Mountlake Terrace or through its contractors. C. Enter into a professional services contract with a qualified firm, individual or entity to apply Ecology- and EPA -approved herbicide(s) to control invasive weeds in Lake Ballinger. D. Pay 100% of the cost for a qualified contractor to perform the application of the Ecology- and EPA -approved herbicide(s) (2019 through 2020 only). 4.2 Edmonds agrees and shall: A. Consent and permit Mountlake Terrace to apply Ecology- and EPA - approved herbicide(s) through a licensed and qualified aquatic herbicide applicator to the portions of Lake Ballinger located within Edmonds city limits consistent with the Ecology -approved Lake Ballinger Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan dated May 2019. B. Track and report city staff time spent on this project and report hours quarterly to the City of Mountlake Terrace for the purpose of claiming grant in -kind contribution of staff time. C. Coordinate and cooperate with the application of the Ecology- and EPA - approved herbicide(s) by Mountlake Terrace or its contractor, including responding to questions from City of Edmonds residents, and other project administration, public education, and outreach tasks as may be necessary. 5. Interlocal Cooperation Act Provisions. 5.1 Purpose. See Section 1 above. 5.2 Duration. In accordance with Section 2 above, this Agreement shall continue until December 31, 2024 unless renewed by mutual agreement as provided, or unless terminated pursuant to Section 3. 5.3 Organization of Separate Entity and its Powers. No separate legal entity is intended to be created pursuant to this Agreement. Administration of this Agreement shall be as set forth in Section 11 below. 5.4 Duty to File Agreement with County Auditor. Each City will, within ten (l 0) days Packet Pg. 18 1.4.a Interlocal Agreement to Control Aquatic Noxious Weeds in Lake Ballinger Page 4 of 6 after this Agreement is executed by both Parties, file this Agreement with the Snohomish County Auditor, or alternatively, list it by subject on its website or other electronically retrievable public source allowed in RCW 39.34.040. 6. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Each of the Parties shall defend, indemnify, and hold the other Party, their officers, officials, employees and agents harmless from any and all costs, claims, judgment, and/or awards of damages, arising out of, or in any way resulting from that other party's negligent acts or omissions in performing under this Agreement or Contract. No Party will be required to defend, indemnify, or hold the other Party harmless if the claim, suit or action for injuries, death, or damages is caused by the sole negligence of that party. Where such claims, suits, or actions result from the concurrent negligence of the Parties, the indemnity provisions provided herein shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of each party's own negligence. Each Party agrees that its obligations under this provision include, but are not limited to, any claim, demand, and/or cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents. For this reason, each of the Parties, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, with respect to the other Party only, any immunity that would otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. 7. Required Insurance. Each Party shall maintain its own insurance and/or self-insurance or equivalent insurance pool coverage for its liabilities from damage to property and/or injuries to persons arising out of its activities associated with this Agreement as it deems reasonably appropriate and prudent. The maintenance of or lack thereof, of insurance and/or self- insurance or equivalent insurance pool coverage shall not limit the liability of the indemnifying Party to the indemnified Party. 8. No Assignment without Authorization. Neither Party shall assign or sublet its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement without the written authorization of the other Party. Written authorization shall not be unreasonably withheld. 9. Dispute Resolution. If either Party claims that the other Party has breached any term of this Agreement, the following procedures shall be followed if and when informal communications, such as telephone conversations, emails or face to face meetings fail to satisfy the claiming Party, or one of the Parties elects to trigger the dispute resolution process at any time, in the event of disputes or disagreements concerning the subject of this Agreement. a. The claiming Party's Designated Representative shall provide a written notice to the other Party's representative of the alleged breach. The notice shall identify the act or omission at issue and the specific term(s) of the Agreement that the complaining Party alleges was violated. Packet Pg. 19 1.4.a Interlocal Agreement to Control Aquatic Noxious Weeds in Lake Ballinger Page 5 of 6 b. The responding Party's Designated Representative shall respond to the notice in writing within fifteen (15) working days. The response shall state the responding Party's position as well as what, if any, corrective action the responding Party agrees to take. C. The complaining Party shall reply in writing, indicating either satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the response. If satisfied, any corrective action shall be taken within fourteen (14) working days of receipt of the responding Party's reply unless otherwise mutually agreed upon. If dissatisfied, the complaining Party shall call an in -person meeting to include the respective department directors. The meeting shall occur within a reasonable period of time and shall be attended by the Designated Representatives of each Party, and such others as they individually invite. d. If the complaining Party remains dissatisfied with the results of the meeting, it shall then refer the matter to Mountlake Terrace's City Manager and Edmonds' Mayor, or to their designees, for resolution. If the issue is not resolved at this level within thirty (30) days, then either Party may require in writing that the matter shall be reviewed in a non -binding, structured mediation process developed on a cooperative basis by the Parties, and the Parties shall consider in good faith any recommendations or settlements arising from such process. All of the steps preceding shall be a prerequisite to either Party suing under this Agreement for breach, specific performance, or any other relief related to this Agreement. 10. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the Agreement will not be affected but continue in full force. 11. Designated Representatives. Each Party shall designate a person who shall be responsible for handling the administrative needs regarding the use of any facilities subject to this Agreement and the implementation of this Agreement. Mountlake Terrace's Designated Representative shall be the Stormwater Program Manager. City of Edmond's Designated Representative shall be the Stormwater Technician. 12. Non -Waiver. The failure by either Party to insist on strict performance of or compliance with any term or condition of this Agreement by the other Party shall not constitute or be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of the Party's right thereafter to insist on strict performance of or compliance with that term or condition, or any other term or condition, of this Agreement, and the same shall continue in full force and effect. 13. Records. Each Party shall maintain records necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Such records shall be available during normal working hours for review by the other Party, its accounting representatives, and the State Auditor. Packet Pg. 20 Interlocal Agreement to Control Aquatic Noxious Weeds in Lake Ballinger Page 6 of 6 1.4.a 14. No Agency Relationship. The Parties to this Agreement are independent entities. This Agreement does not and shall not be interpreted or construed to create any agency relationship between the Parties. 15. InterpretationNenue. This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be in the Snohomish County Superior Court. 16. Entire Agreement. This Agreement is the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes and merges with any prior agreements of the Parties, written or oral. This Agreement shall be amended only in writing with the written Agreement signed by both Parties. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the later of the dates set forth below. City of Mountlake Terrace City Manager Scott Hugill Date: Approved as to Form City Attorney Gregory G. Schrag City of Edmonds Mayor David O. Earling Date: Approved as to Form Office of the City Attorney Packet Pg. 21 1.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Presentation of an Intergovernmental Services Agreement with the Snohomish County, for development of an on -going water quality monitoring program for Lake Ballinger Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the June 18, 2019, consent agenda for Council approval. Narrative Through staff work with the Lake Ballinger Forum, a desire for continuous and on -going monitoring of the water quality health within Lake Ballinger was identified by both residents and staff. Employees and residents have worked to identify the most appropriate method of establishing a long-term program and have reached the conclusion that a volunteer -based monitoring program which is overseen by trained technical staff from Snohomish County would be the most appropriate mechanism to monitor lake water quality. The 'Lakewise Program' administered through Snohomish County, manages several lakes throughout the County and has staff who are technically trained in lake water quality data gathering and reporting. The proposed program utilizes the County's technical staff to properly train lake residents in methods of gathering samples and following required chain of custody for data validation. Snohomish County staff will review the water quality data and provide a full report annually, along with a quick summary 'water quality report card' for the lake. The information and data will also be publically available on the County water quality database webpage. A volunteer resident has been identified through our work with the Forum and is eager to begin the new role as the Lake Ballinger Water Quality Monitor. Edmonds resident, Ms. Julie Rose will be our wonderful first volunteer to get the program started. Since moving to the Lake Ballinger area, Julie has been a true lake steward in every sense and having previously worked in an environmentally related field, the fit is perfect and we are happy to have her as a water quality monitor. Through continued Forum meetings, working with citizens through the application of herbicides this summer, and our work with non-profits/education groups, staff hope to also add more volunteers as the program establishes itself. The City of Edmonds will share all costs of the program equally with our partners at the City of Mountlake Terrace. Edmonds direct cost for 2019 is limited to $2,968.50, which is easily covered by the annual budget allotted for Lake Ballinger -related projects. Future years require the County to provide Packet Pg. 22 1.5 cost estimates for written City approval prior to commencing work, but the agreement also includes a 'max cost' clause so that the program cannot cost the City more than $25,000 total before its initial expiration in 2024. Again, these costs are within currently projected annual budget amounts and would not require additional funding to support. At the end of the initial expiration in 2024, the City can consider the option to continue the program or allow it to expire. The agreement does include several potential additional services which are currently outside of staff technical abilities, and which the City can request in writing when needed. The ability to tap into those services, gives staff and residents better flexibility to respond to concerns, algae blooms, or other issues which could arise quickly as lake conditions change. Attachments: Intergovernmental Services Agreement with Sno. County Packet Pg. 23 1.5.a INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES This AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES (this "Agreement") is made and entered into as of this day of , 2019 (the "Execution Date"), by and between the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation, the CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, a Washington municipal corporation, (together the "Cities"), and SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Washington (the "County"). RECITALS A. Lake Ballinger lies within the boundaries of the City of Edmonds and the City of Mountlake Terrace. B. Lake Ballinger is an important water resource for both the City of Edmonds and the City of Mountlake Terrace which provides opportunities for swimming, boating, fishing and aesthetic enjoyment. C. The Cities and the County recognize the importance of performing certain water quality monitoring services at Lake Ballinger. D. The Cities do not have the staff or resources to monitor water quality at Lake Ballinger E. The Cities desire to retain the services of the County to perform certain water quality monitoring at Lake Ballinger and the County has the staff and resources to perform said services, all under the terms and conditions described in this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the respective agreements set forth below and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Cities and the County agree as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement (the "Term") shall commence upon execution (the "Commencement Date"), and shall expire on December 31, 2024 (the "Expiration Date"); provided, however, that both the Cities' and the County's obligations after December 31, 2019, are contingent upon local legislative appropriation of the necessary funds for this specific purpose in accordance with applicable law. 2. CATEGORIES OF SERVICES PERFORMED BY COUNTY AND RIGHT OF ENTRY During the Term of this Agreement, the County shall perform for the Cities the following services (collectively, the "Services"): (i) lake monitoring services, as more fully described in Section 3 below (the "Lake Monitoring Services"); and (ii) any additional services related to water quality or quantity issues that may be mutually agreed upon in writing by the Cities and the County pursuant to Section 4 below (the "Additional Services"). The Services shall be performed in a good and professional manner, consistent with accepted industry standards and in accordance with both the substantive and procedural requirements specified in this Agreement. AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT pg. 1 AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES Packet Pg. 24 1.5.a The Cities shall provide the County with reasonable access to any location where Services are to be provided. If the Cities are unable to provide such access, the County shall have no obligation to perform any Services under this Agreement unless and until the Cities provide reasonable access. 3. LAKE MONITORING SERVICES 3.1. Lake Water Quality Monitoring The County, through the assistance of trained citizen volunteers, will perform basic water quality monitoring of Lake Ballinger two times per month from May through October of each contract year per volunteer availability. Basic monitoring will be conducted in the deepest portion of the lake and will consist of measurements of water clarity (Secchi depth) and near -surface water temperature, as well as observations of water color and algae abundance. Water column profiles for temperature and dissolved oxygen will also be taken as a part of basic monitoring per availability of a dissolved oxygen/temperature meter (meter). If the Cities provide a meter, the profiles will be included every year as part of basic monitoring. The County will provide basic maintenance of a Cities -provided meter, but will not be responsible for repairs. If the Cities do not provide a meter, then Lake Ballinger volunteers will be provided with a County meter at least every third year. The County will be responsible for all maintenance and repairs of County -provided instruments. The County will also provide more detailed monitoring of Lake Ballinger from June through September of each contract year including in months when a volunteer is not available. The detailed monitoring will be conducted in the deepest portion of the lake and will include water samples for laboratory analysis. Water samples will be taken from the epilimnion (1 meter depth) and will be analyzed for total phosphorus, chlorophyll a, and total persulfate nitrogen. Samples will also be taken from a hypolimnetic depth (1 meter from the lake bottom) and will be analyzed for total phosphorus. All monitoring will be conducted in accordance with the "Quality Assurance Monitoring Plan for the Snohomish County Lake Management Program" as updated. Citizen volunteers will be trained by the County in proper monitoring techniques and will be supervised by County staff. Water samples will be analyzed by a Washington State Department of Ecology -accredited laboratory. The laboratory results are sent to the County in electronic format. The cost for all such services shall be as set forth in Section 5 below. 3.2. Reporting of Water Quality Data All data collected from Lake Ballinger will be summarized annually in two written reports that will be made available to the Cities and the general public. The first is a water quality report card, a short summary for the public of lake health. The second report is a more detailed report with a summary of all data collected through the monitoring program. The reports for a given calendar year shall be delivered to the Cities on or before March 15 after the close of the calendar year at issue. The reports will also be made available on Snohomish County's website unless otherwise directed by the Cities. The raw water quality data shall be available on the County's online water quality database following completion of quality assurance checks. Copies of the raw data shall also be provided to the Cities upon request. If requested by the Cities, County staff will also provide a single annual public presentation on the condition of water quality in Lake Ballinger. The County will also provide comments on documents, reports, or grant proposals related to lake water quality that may be developed by the Cities for the management of Lake Ballinger. AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT pg. 2 AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES Packet Pg. 25 1.5.a 3.3. Technical Assistance County staff will be available to respond to questions from the public and the Cities about the water quality conditions in Lake Ballinger via email or phone. The County will also provide plant identification services as requested. The County will refer all other inquiries, including those regarding lake management actions, to the Cities. 4. ADDITIONAL SERVICES 4.1. Desire for Additional Services The County and the Cities anticipate that, during the Term of this Agreement, the Cities may desire for the County to provide additional water quality monitoring or related services (the "Additional Services") to the Cities, and the County may be willing to provide some or all of such Additional Services. By way of example, and not by way of limitation, the parties anticipate Additional Services could involve any one or more of the following: (i) sampling one or more water quality monitoring sites for additional or different water quality parameters at Lake Ballinger and/or its tributaries; (ii) monitoring of blooms of potentially toxic algae; (iii) commencement of other activities as requested or as mutually agreed that enhance the Cities' water quality program. 4.2. Request for Additional Services Subject to the total cost limitation described in Section 5.4 below, at any time and from time to time during the Term of this Agreement, the Cities may request that the County perform one or more Additional Services. The Cities may request that such Additional Services be performed a specific number of times, or on an ongoing basis, for a single calendar year, or for multiple calendar years. The County may, but need not, agree to perform some or all of the requested Additional Services under terms and conditions acceptable to both parties. Any agreement to add Additional Services must be memorialized in writing and signed by the City Manager for each City and the County's Director (as those terms are defined in Section 4.3 below). 4.3. Authority to Request and Approve Additional Services Subject to the total cost limitation described in Section 5.4 below, the City Manager for each City shall have the authority to request, authorize and memorialize Additional Services on behalf of that City without the need to obtain additional approvals from the City Council or the Mayor. Subject to the total cost limitation described in Section 5.4 below, the Director of the County's Department of Public Works (the "County's Director") shall have the authority to agree to perform and memorialize Additional Services on behalf of the County without the need to obtain additional approvals from the County Executive. 5. COMPENSATION 5.1. Cost of Lake Monitoring Services in 2019 The Cities shall pay the County $5,937 in 2019 for the cost of Lake Monitoring Services. The City of Edmonds shall pay 50% of the costs ($2968.50 in 2019). The City of Mountlake Terrace shall pay 50% of the costs ($2968.50 in 2019). AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT pg. 3 AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES Packet Pg. 26 1.5.a 5.2. Cost of Additional Services Unless specifically otherwise provided herein, the County shall be compensated for all Additional Services on a time and materials basis. The County's time shall be calculated based on the base hourly rate of each of the individual County Personnel (as that term is defined in Section 6 below) performing the Services. The actual reasonable cost of benefits shall be added to the base hourly rate of all County Personnel. The time billed to the Cities shall consist only of personnel time that is actually spent and is reasonably required to perform the Services. The Cities shall reimburse the County for all reasonable costs actually incurred by the County in connection with performing the Services, including, but not limited to, laboratory fees. The Cities shall reimburse the County for the reasonable costs of materials and/or equipment the County uses in connection with performing any one or more of the Additional Services. Reimbursement for additional services will be split between the cities at the percentages shown in Section 5.1 of this Agreement. 5.3. Cost of Services in Following Years Beginning in 2019, on or before October 1 st of each year, the County shall provide the Cities with a written estimate for the total cost of performing the Services for the following calendar year. Both Cities must provide written acceptance of the cost estimate to the County on or before November 1st of the year that the County's cost estimate is provided. This Agreement shall terminate on December 31 st of the year that the County's cost estimate is provided to the Cities if either: (1) one or both of the Cities do not provide written acceptance of the County's cost estimate as required in this Section; or (2) one or both of the Cities rejects the County's cost estimate. 5.4. Total Services Not to Exceed $50,000 Maximum Cost Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained elsewhere in this Agreement, the total cumulative cost of all Services performed by the County under this Agreement shall not exceed Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) (the "Maximum Cost"). Accordingly, if any proposal to add one or more Additional Services to this Agreement would cause the total cost of Services to exceed the Maximum Cost, the Cities shall not submit a request for such Additional Services to the County. Should the County receive a request for Additional Services that would cause the total cost of all Services to exceed the Maximum Cost, the County shall reject said request. 5.5. Invoicing and Payment The County shall submit one invoice to each of the Cities by October 1 st of each year itemizing the cost of providing the Lake Monitoring Services for the current calendar year. The County shall also submit one or more invoices each year to the Cities for any Additional Services agreed to by the County and the Cities. Invoices for Additional Services shall describe in reasonable detail the cost of time and materials spent by the County on Additional Services during the period at issue. The Cities shall pay each invoice within thirty (30) days of receiving same. Invoices shall be sent to the following addresses: City of Edmonds Attn: Patrick Johnson 121 5`" Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 City of Mountlake Terrace Attn: Laura Reed 6100 219" Street SW, Suite 200 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES pg. 4 Packet Pg. 27 1.5.a 6. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR All work performed by the County pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed by the County as an independent contractor and not as an agent or employee of the Cities. The County shall furnish, employ, and have exclusive control of all persons (including, but not limited to volunteers) to be engaged in performing the County's obligations under this Agreement (collectively, the "County Personnel") and shall prescribe and control the means and methods of performing such obligations by providing adequate and proper supervision. The County Personnel shall for all purposes be solely the employees, agents or volunteers of the County and shall not be deemed to be employees or agents of the Cities for any purpose whatsoever. With respect to the County Personnel, the County shall be solely responsible for compliance with all rules, laws, and regulations relating to employment of labor, hours of labor, working conditions, payment of wages and payment of taxes, such as employment, Social Security, and other payroll taxes including applicable contributions from the County Personnel when required by law. 7. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE This Agreement may be terminated by any party for any reason or for no reason, by giving thirty (30) days advance written notice of termination to the other parties. Any termination notice delivered pursuant to this Section 7 shall specify the date on which the Agreement will terminate. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section 7, the County shall continue performing Services through the date of termination. The Cities shall compensate the County for all Services performed by the County through the date of termination on a pro -rated basis. The Cities' obligation to make such fmal payment to the County shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 8. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Cities and the County shall at all times exercise their rights and perform their respective obligations under this Agreement in full compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of any public authority having jurisdiction. 9. INDEMNIFICATION Each party to this Agreement shall indemnify, defend and hold every other party and its elected officials, agents, employees and contractors harmless from and against any and all costs, liabilities, suits, losses, damages, claims, expenses, penalties or charges, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees and disbursements, that the other parties may incur or pay out by reason of. (i) any accidents, damages or injuries to persons or property occurring during the Term of this Agreement, but only to the extent the same are caused by any negligent or wrongful act of the indemnifying party; or (ii) any breach or Default (as such term is defined in Section 10 below) of the indemnifying party under this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 9 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. 10. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES If any party to this Agreement fails to perform any act or obligation required to be performed by it hereunder, the party or parties to whom such performance was due shall deliver written notice of such failure to the non -performing party. The non -performing party shall have thirty (30) days after its receipt of such notice in which to correct its failure to perform the act or obligation at issue, after which time it shall be in default ("Default") under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the non- performance is of a type that could not reasonably be cured within said thirty (30) day period, then the non -performing party shall not be in Default if it commences cure within said thirty (30) day period AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT pg. 5 AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES Packet Pg. 28 1.5.a and thereafter diligently pursues cure to completion. In the event of a party's Default under this Agreement, then after giving notice and an opportunity to cure, the party or parties to whom the performance was due shall have the right to exercise any or all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity. 11. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE LAWS The Cities and the County each acknowledge, agree and understand that the other parties are public agencies subject to certain disclosure laws, including, but not limited to Washington's Public Records Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. Each party understands that records related to this Agreement and the County's performance of Services under this Agreement may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the Public Records Act or other similar law. Neither the Cities nor the County anticipates that the performance of any party's obligations under this Agreement will involve any confidential or proprietary information. 12. NOTICES Each notice, demand, request, consent, approval, disapproval, designation or other communication that is permitted or required to be given by one party to another party under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given or made or communicated by: (i) United States registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested; (ii) any nationally recognized overnight carrier or express mail service (such as FedEx or DHL) that provides receipts to indicate delivery; (iii) by personal delivery; or (iv) by facsimile (with proof of successful transmission); (v) or by email (with a request for and receipt of proof of successful transmission). All such communications shall be addressed to the appropriate Administrator of this Agreement (or their designee) as follows: To the City of Edmonds: ATTN: Patrick Johnson 121 5 h Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 Telephone: 425-771-0220 x1322 Email: patJohnsonna?edmondswa.gov To the County: ATTN: Surface Water Management Director or Designee Snohomish County Department of Public Works 3000 Rockefeller Avenue M/S 607 Everett, Washington 98201 Telephone: (425) 388-6454 Facsimile: (425) 388-6455 Email: Gregg.farris@snoco.org To the City of Mountlake Terrace: ATTN: Laura Reed 6100 219'h Street SW, Suite 200 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 Telephone: 425-744-6226 Email: lreed(a? ci. mlt. wa.us All notices shall be deemed given on the day each such notice is personally delivered, transmitted by facsimile (with evidence of receipt), or delivered by overnight courier service, or on the third business day following the day such notice is mailed if mailed in accordance with this Section. AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES pg. 6 Packet Pg. 29 1.5.a 13. MISCELLANEOUS 13.1. Entire Agreement This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof, and supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements between the parties regarding the subject matter contained herein. This Agreement may not be modified or amended in any manner except by a written document signed by the party against whom such modification is sought to be enforced. 13.2. Interpretation This Agreement shall be governed by and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. This Agreement and each of the terms and provisions of it are deemed to have been explicitly negotiated by the parties, and the language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed according to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against the parties hereto. The captions and headings in this Agreement are used only for convenience and are not intended to affect the interpretation of the provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be construed so that wherever applicable the use of the singular number shall include the plural number, and vice versa, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. 13.3. Severability If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, for any reason and to any extent, be found invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement and the application of that provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby, but shall instead continue in full force and effect, to the extent permitted by law. 13.4. No Waiver A party's forbearance or delay in exercising any right or remedy with respect to a Default by another party under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the Default at issue. Nor shall a waiver by a party of any particular Default constitute a waiver of any other Default or any similar future Default. 13.5. Assignment This Agreement shall not be assigned, either in whole or in part, by the parties hereto. Any attempt to assign this Agreement in violation of the preceding sentence shall be null and void and shall constitute a Default under this Agreement. 13.6. Warranty of Authority Each of the signatories hereto warrants and represents that he or she is competent and authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the party for whom he or she purports to sign this Agreement. 13.7. No Joint Venture Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as creating any type or manner of partnership, joint venture or other joint enterprise between the parties. AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT pg. 7 AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES Packet Pg. 30 1.5.a 13.8. No Third Party Beneficiaries This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole benefit of the Cities and the County. No third party shall be deemed to have any rights under this Agreement; there are no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement. 13.9. Execution in Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities and the County have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. CITY OF EDMONDS: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation By Name: Title: Approved as to Form: City Attorney SNOHOMISH COUNTY: Snohomish County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington By Name: Title: Approved as to Form: (� S/31 Deputy Prosecuting Attorney AGREEMENT FOR LAKE MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY SERVICES CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE: City of Mountlake Terrace, a Washington municipal corporation By Name: Title: Approved as to Form: City Attorney pg. 8 Packet Pg. 31 1.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Lynnwood Mazda Pedestrian Easement Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the consent agenda for approval at the June 18, 2019 Council meeting. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed development project, the Mazda Showroom and Service Center, located at 22214 Highway 99. This property has frontage improvements along Highway 99 and 76t" Ave W. In accordance with the Edmonds Community Development Code, 7-ft sidewalks will be constructed along the property frontage. In addition, street trees will be installed in tree grates along both property frontages. In order to provide all required frontage improvements, portions of the public sidewalk will encroach onto private property. This occurs in 5 sections on Highway 99 and in 5 sections on 76t" Ave W. Therefore, for these 10 sections of sidewalk, a public pedestrian easement shall be provided to the City. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Mazda Site Plan with Easement Packet Pg. 32 1.6.a ............ z20TH STS►iU ,,- , II 1:-i n, Z21ST PLSw, •• II 1I=rn u � I I k�sgF�,k3atr� i� Ili a • I _ter � �d� ILL u I 01 Br- T,77;7� 2 2 3 RQ St SW �. , •'tom., �'� I -... I _ I -.1': 2 4 TKS T mil- i I L !I!II L .4 -s 19i 21.11,P. I � ._•13� d � � a7-��la-tt ctinr aiza� �IV IM A� da 51rxx�urngnn aM Svrh ix Ctr y- ZZZ�4 N�9hwo�y 9� a Packet Pg. 33 1 � Avoid planting in summer months. ----------------------------------------- Stake trees as necessary. @ 31 r l k architecture ( design 11.16.18 t Rubber Hose Guy wires - 3 per tree flogged for visibility 2"x2"x24" stokes Tree Planting Detail applies to shrubs as well no stoking necessary for shrubs Set crown 2" above finished grode Wood chip or bark mulch Form watering well Excavate 2x width of rootball' "remove burlap from top half of rootboll I ,-Q� Plant in 50-50 mix of topsoil and native soil \/ Tomped soil setting bed Existing soil 3 1 r I k architecture I design {f Plant Materials r�r :Y. Amenity Space Garden kp r a 1 Thuja plicata - Western Red Cedor / 4-5' ff Acer rubrum 'Red Sunset' - Red Mople / 2" cal. Prunus cerasifero 'Thundercloud' - Purple Plum / 2" cal. oa K OQ� 0 47 Potentillo fruiticoso 'Goldfinger' - Cinquefoil / 1 gal. 0000 s 34 Nondino dom. 'Gulf Stream' 2 gal. 81 Mohonio repens - Creeping Mohonio / 1 gol. 12 Mohonio oquifolium - Oregon Grape / 5 gal. Viburnum dovidii / 2 gal. rp Rubus pentolobus - Creeping Raspberry / 4" 0 2' o.c. FexAle�� I �l� WAY `i� l7eciC5}�'i OWE 4-�5 beh��d t7KcckT+reeS All perimeter buffers to be maintained. Amend oll plantings areas with 3" of compost Interior Landscape Calculations ' e.g. cedar groves compost or gro-co. Mazda Service Site --- Mulch oll planting beds with 3" wood or bark mulch. I ;Q Provide design/build irrigation (permit req.) for all plantings. - 19 stalls @ 17.5 sq.f t./stoll - 332.5 sq.ft. Fallow City of Edmonds Landscape code. i 400 sq.ft. provided i Provide sleeves for piping under paths to access oil planting areas. Plant substitutions ore o.k. if confirmed by landscope architect. �s l 0 7.5 15 30 60 r"liorm 265 Winslow Way East Suite 202D Bain bridge Island Washington 98110 telephone 206 842 1253 e-mail fronk03rkorchitec ture.com CONSULTANTS: O Z Odd Ld0 JOB O (r- i.¢._OC=� Sw w U �0 O � w � v TGLA,LLC Landscape Architect Q 0 N Q 0 O O W°' a Z w =o Z V C7 00 Q U) W LL M. WUv'i Q � Z 0 N 0 N LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1 "=30'-0" ISSUE DATE: 11.16.18 REVISIONS: 2/19/19 PERMIT REVISIONS PERMIT SET Ll m0 LDZ() I . I L4q Packet Pg. 34 1.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Larsen Short Plat - 10-ft Street ROW Dedication along 75th PI W and Retaining Wall Maintenance Easement along 72nd Ave W Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the June 18, 2019, consent agenda for Council approval. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed 3-lot subdivision, at 15729 - 751" PI W. In accordance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.75.085 (Subdivision - Review Criteria), the city council may require dedication of land in the proposed subdivision for public use. In accordance with ECDC 18.50.020 (Official Street Map - Dedication presumption and requirement), applicants for a subdivision shall be presumed to create development impacts upon the street and transportation system of the city and such presumed impacts shall be mitigated by the dedication of such right-of-way to the city and to public use. The City's Official Street Map indicates a 10-foot right-of- way dedication is required along the 751" PI W property frontage of the subject development. As a condition of development, the 10-foot right-of-way shall be deeded to the City. In addition, the subject development is required to extend a currently undeveloped section of 72nd Ave W to provide access to the subject development. Due to existing topography, the extension of the public road will require the construction of retaining walls at the west edge of the 72nd Ave W right-of- way. An easement shall be provided to the City across the adjacent private properties to allow for future maintenance, repair, and reconstruction of the retaining wall. An easement will be required across the subject property as well as the property to the north (15724 - 72nd Ave W). Attachments: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Dedication Attachment 3 - Wall Maintenance Easement Attachment 4 - Preliminary Short Plat Packet Pg. 35 1.7.a 9 156th St SW Tiffany Hansen Sales m 4 a' qc q n ry P Mark Mercado 157th Sl SW s, r� PUGET SOUND �15729 75th Place West a a � 15IIth 51 54'1 g h n` a n >jowd�e a N Maa �a a 3 � � S h n n �ddp Bernard Ford v �daIPR Education Services �Paq pd,P Figure: Vicinity map (image from Google Maps). Attachment 1 Packet Pg. 36 1.7.b CAS LARK) UNC /201 ;SMH 1.24 \ 9.12 T S 88' I� II"' 10' RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION v) a BRIC ONC PLANTER _ I 0.0 N I DRIVEWAY APPROACHe I C3.3 I I N I GARAGE II <. FF=107.5' o SI 2' MIN SAW , EDGE OF Rf1 E. ENT 0' 120' ► )I VE AL CURB & GUTTER H OU S � I o Q 2 � FF=104 I ON!� - C. � v,,A FF=112 o o I O WA — — IN w o o ; o Q ± 20, 00,0 P CONC /R Z Lf- WA- - WA- - 4 I / Pi a C3.3 P ? 0 / z Q � o � ---- -- �! - - - - - - - - - ---- WA wq WA g. A��IE�=l G G It 1 SCALE: 1" = 20' INSTALL FIRE/AID DDRE SI\GN,�GE FOR LOT 2 PER ss s Attachment 2 Packet Pg. 37 a 1.7.c T�„ � 4- b\RIP INE TYf' 15724 - 72nd Ave W FOUND REBP,R & CAP � LDC \48761 AT CORNER 15729 - 75th PI W LL=Lbl.b4 I GATE PRO OSED RO PE CIVIL PLA 2 � 06 I I o I I I 6 I 0 � 600 I I o I I o 7 0 5s o CN 9 9 I I oo V- I I 8 I I � I 00 00 00 I I I I 9 I ^ , 5 W CN\ Q L------�----------------� I 0 _ z � 0 FOUND 3,// IRON" PPE W/99 T99 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" 2751 ............................................................................. 275' EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE 270' 270' (2) TEMPORARY PILES TO BE CUT BELOW TOP - 263GRADE WHEN UPPER LOT DEVELOPED 265' ........... ......... .. ... ....TOP=.. ............................ 265' 262.4' TOP = 261.4' TOP = 260.4' 260' . . . . . . . . . . . I I . . . . . . I J . . . . . . I I . . . . TOP.=. 260' I I I I III I I I I I I 257.4' TOP = 11 I IIII III I I 1 255.4' 255' ........... I.I I .....I I., ....111.1.... I 1 .....I I I I .... .. _ 1..... ; ...... , ..... 1 ..... 255' IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII i111. .11 I I J I II II I I �. . . . . . . .�I1I1I�I1 lll.I1Il . . . . llIJ.l . . . I1I1II . . .IIIIIII . . .II.IIJII. . . .II.IIII . . . . . IIII.II . . . IIIIIII. . . IIII IIII250'250' II .N �Illl r,1111 x,1111 01111 IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII �1I.I1 `IIII "'IIII IIII o1.11I IIII II11 . IIII IIII IIII 245 . . . . . . 1111. . . . .IIII. �III.l.IIII IIIIIIII. �II.II. . . . II1I. . . . .IIII . . . .IIII. . . . . . . . . . . 245 I�IIJIIIII; IIIIJII �l;lIlIlI ,�1I 1I IIII `°IlIIIlIIIII 01IIIIIII IIJI N, I X III of 240' ................. . .. I.I. .. XI1I . .......... 240BOP J BOP IIIJill241' 240 2 BOP = -- 111 1111 239' 3; BOP Jill IIII 1111 IIII IIII IIII 1111 235' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .238" 4,. . . . . . Lu . . . . 1.111 . . . .11.11. . . . J 11.1 . . 1111. . . . III 1 . . . . Jill . . . . . . . . . . . 235' U Jill 1111 u 1111 Jill BOP= U IIIJ U IIII T1 BOP = LU BOP = u 230' 234 . . . . 232' . .BOP. _. \.5 BOP = 23.3' . Q 202 = 0 BOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230' 233 231' © 231' 0 FOUND REBAR 0 99275' UARDRA EM ERSON 17F G IL EXTEND PILES V-0" PER CIVIL EXIST GRADE 3.2 5' V V 0 F R 270' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ABOVE EXIST GRADE \n/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . DRI EWAY �� PER IVIL �� I enance265'..................................................� ...... ....... ............�............ A-- - - nn' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .� . I I II- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . nn002 00 -M CB T-1 24 .14' E-246.16'(12 PVC N; E-245.17'(12 PVC S) E--245.22'(6" PVC N) I I I I a 10 0 5 10 20 255' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PILE PER PLAN & PROFILE I 250' ................................. ... ....�............1.II ............................ ............ 245' ..................... �' ........................I.II............................... III ........... 240' ................................................I. III I II � .................................I............ 235' ................................................ ................................ ........... 230'................................................ ................................ ........... PROFILE CANTILEVERED SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE PILE(S) 1-4 5-6 7-9 T 1-T2 MIN PILE SHAFT DIA 2'-0110 2'-0110 2'-011 "0 2'-00 MAX RETAINED HT 5 -0 7 -0 5 -0 7--0" 10" Ilk 6 1/2" N. io Lo 0 W 14x61 W 12X30 NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY THAT THE MAX. RETAINED HEIGHT IS NOT EXCEEDED. 2. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT HEIGHT ABOVE FINAL GRADE TO ALLOW FOR ADJACENT PILE LAGGING. 3. REFER TO SHORING DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 4. REFER TO THE SHORING PROFILE FOR TOP & BOT. OF PILES 5. SEE DETAIL 1/SH3.1 FOR RELATED INFORMATION NOT SHOWN. SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE SCALE: NTS Attachment 3 = 0- 4M�1116 1 ENGINEERING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 WW19 1 a H ~ H � Z OLu m cn Sul= �F- F- U � � ww w oCL CL 00 0) oo O Y Q DESIGN: BTJ DRAWN: JCP CHECK: DMT JOB NO: 1 71 45.1 5 DATE: 1 1 /02/ 1 8 Q CL w N _ ?� O V) 00 J (3) ova J = M U-) w �o CD Z LZ 0 w � :2 J Lo CW SHEET: V) W O Of 0- Z Q Z Q J 0- z LL O V SH2ml Packet Pg. 38 1.7.d A PORTION OF THE 5W 1 /4, 5E 1 /4 OF 5ECTION 5, TOWN5HIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EA5T, W.M. SITE D4MrA 51TE ADDRESS: 15729 75TH PI. W. EDMONDS, WA 95026 TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 00133-000--027-00 EXI5TING ZON[NG: 125-20 EXI5T]NG COMP. PLAN: 5INGLE FAMILY RESOURCE PROPOSED LAND USE: 5INGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL G2055 SITE AREA: 60,415 5F (L57 ACRES) NUMBER OF LOTS PROPOSED: 3 UNITS GR055 ACRE OF LAND: 3 UNIT5/1.57 ACRES = 1.91 UNITS PER ACRE AVERAGE SIZE OF LOTS: 22,404 5F LOT COvORAGra LOT AREA MAX. BUILDING COVERAGE (35%) PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE LOT 1 20,099 5F 7,000 5F 1.465 5F LOT 2 26.712 5F 9,303 5F 1,056 5F LOT 3 20,400 5F 7.140 5F 7.140 5F SLOPE 4N4LYSf S SLOPE % AREA (59. FT.) C 15 31,664 15 - ZO 2,549 ZO - 25 3,253 25 - 30 3,957 30 - 40 4.717 40 22.131 OF SITE 0.73 46.35 0.06 3.73 0.00 4.77 0.09 5.50 0.11 6.91 0.51 32.42 LECx9ND 0 —X— MONUMENT, A5 NOTED IRON PIPE OR REBAR AND CAP (RBC), AS NOTED MAIL Box CO-) SEWER MANHOLE E-- UTILITY POLE 0 GUY WIRE wv N WATER METER CO ❑ WATER VALVE SEWER CLEAN OUT DQ POWER METER <D IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE —55— UTILITY RISER SEWER L[NE LET I L 1 TY NOTES FENCE 5A5I5 FOR UTILITY LINES SHOWN: FIELD OBSERVATIONS & A5-BUILT MAPS IN PROVIDING THI5 SURVEY, NO ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO OBTAIN OR SHOW DATA CONCERNINC, CONDITION OR CAPACITY OF ANY UTILITY EXI5TING ON TH15 SITE, WHETHER PRIVATE, MUNICIPAL 02 PUBLIC OWNED. UTILITIES OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN MAY EXIST ON THE SITE, UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE TAKEN FROM A COMPILATION OF PUBLIC RECORDS AND VISIBLE FIELD EVIDENCE. WE ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS. UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE. UNDERGROUND CONNECTIONS ARE SHOWN AS STRAIGHT LINES BETWEEN VI5IBLE SURFACE LOCATIONS BUT MAY CONTAIN BEN05 OR CURVES NOT SHOWN. FIELD VERIFICATION 15 NECF-55ARY PRIOR TO OR DURING ANY CONSTRUCTION. SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE NOT SURVEYED OR EXAMINED OR CON5I0ERE0 AS PART OF THIS SURVEY. NO EVIDENCE. OR STATEMENT 15 MADE CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND OR OVERHEAD CONDITIONS, CONTAINERS 02 FACILITIES THAT MAY AFFECT THE USE OR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY. { 0 Q w VAN & PAMELA CARYL u 15701 75TH PL W 503°130.70' � E0MON05, WA 90026 30.70 N0702010'W I ? 23.74' 10' DEDICATED TO CITY OF EDMONDS FOUND MONUMENT IN CASE (PROJECT BENCHMARK}- CONC MON W/1-3/4" BRASS D15C & PUNCH VISITED 04/2017 NO3°17'29'E KOO' FOUND MONUMENT IN CASE CONIC MON W/1-3/4' 13RA55 DISC & PUNCH VISITED 04/2017 SCOTT OATE5 7400 1513TH ST 5W EDMONDS, WA 90026 NATIVE VEGETATION BOUNDARY LET I L I T1' NOTES 5A515 FOR UTILITY LINES SHOWN: j _W WATER LINE FIELD 0135ERVATION5 & AS -BUILT MAPS N z ,n I TE ry n — P — OVERHEAD POWER IN PROVIDING THI5 SURVEY, NO ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO OBTAIN OR ,- �, to 5FR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SHOW DATA CONCERNING CONDITION OR CAPACITY OF ANY UTILITY EXI5TING ON THIS 51TE, WHETHER PRIVATE, MUNICIPAL OR PUBLIC OWNED.CL BSBL BUILDING SETBACK LINE UTILITIES OTHER THAN TH05L SHOWN MAY EXI5T ON THE SITE, FRONT = 25' SIDE = 10' MIN (35' TOTAL) UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE TAKEN FROM A 160TH � REAR = 25' COMPILATION OF PUBLIC RECORDS AND V151BLE FIELD EVIDENCE. WE. SLOPE = 10' ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS. UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE. UNDERGROUND STEEP SLOPE (40% 7) CONNECTIONS ARE SHOWN AS STRAIGHT LINES BETWEEN VISIBLE o m SURFACE LOCATIONS BUT MAY CONTAIN BENDS OR CURVES NOT SHOWN. co FIELD VERIFICATION 15 NECE55ARY PRIOR TO OR DURING ANY EXISTING CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 164TH SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE NOT SURVEYED OR EXI5TING GRAVEL EXAMINED OR CONSIDERED A5 PART OF THIS SURVEY. NO EVIDENCE OR STATEMENT I5 MADE CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND OR OVERHEAD CONDITIONS, CONTAINF125 OR FACILITIES THAT MAY AFFECT EXI5TING ASPHALT THE USE OR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY. VICINITY i"i,4P 4PRIL 23, 2p19 w 4 ti r F �€�{.k4t4E4kk4kttEEE'!!lllll�:iiiiiiiJ 3 u7 0 50 25 ❑ 50 SCALE: 1'=50' �' r 'Conditions of approval must be met and can be found in the approval for the short subdivision located in File No. PIN20100033 in the Cify of Edmonds Planning Division." r 1 FOUND REBAR & CAP PL.S 10219' r 0.30'5A0-02'W WATER EASEMENT NOTE: EXISTING BUILDING TO REMAIN 15OLIND4RY SETE34r.< LINE TABLE Lot 1 Street Setbacks (25 feet): From 75th PI. W. Side Setbacks (10/35 feet): From the northern and southern property lines Rear Setback (25 feet): From the eastern property line. Lot 2 Side Setbacks (10/35 feet): Lot 3 Street Setbacks (25 feet): Side Setbacks (10/35 feet): Rear Setback (25 feet): From all the property lines. From 72nd Ave. W. From the northern and southern property lines From the western property line. TAMELA & STEVEN zAMf'ERIN 15724 72ND AVE W EDMOND5, WA 913026 �I FOUND REBAR & CAP f 1 'LOC 48761' - t 0.02, 5 x 0.19, W r1 I � TBM 'A' (NAVDBS) EL=261.64' � r JOHN BEER5 7324 150TH 5T 5W EDMOND5, WA 90026 4PPRQ\/ED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF ED1"IONDS WiL•1114 ".1 CITY ENGINEER FOUND RtEA2 & CAR SCALE: 1' = 1,000' LSGAL DESCRIPTION TP#00513300002700 PER CHICAGO TITLE GUARAN.TfE NUMBER 500056JO99 TRACT 27, MEADDWDALE BEACH SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS AT PAGE 42, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WA5HINGTON. 54616 OF BEA;Z INCH N44°34'36"E. BETWEEN FOUND MONUMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF 75TH PL W AND 150TH 5T 5W AND THE [NTE9-5ECTION OF 72ND AVE W AND 156TH 5T 5W PER THE 5H09-T PLAT OF MEADOWVIE.W E5TATE5 AF#201612095001 D01,OrU "; NAVO 00 �3EN�►f"I'�I,LI,RIC PROJECT BENCHMARK: CONCRETE MONUMENT IN CAST AT THE INTERSECTION OF 75TH PL W AND 150TH 5T 5W EL=100.67' TBM 'A': MAG NAIL & WASHER LOCATED IN THE WESTERLY EOGE OF ASPHALT OF 72ND AVE W. ACRO55 THE STREET AND +/- 10 NORTHERLY OF A FIRE HYDRANT. EL=261.64' ELEVATION DATUM CONVERSION: NAVDBS - 3.62' = NGVD29 PROJECT BENCHMARK DERIVED FROM GP5 OCCUPATION UTILIZING THE WA5H]NGTON STATE REFERENCE NETWORK. SLURvEY REFERENCES SHORT PLAT MEADOWVIEW ESTATES AF#201612095001 PLAT OF MEADDWDALE BEACH VOL 5, PG. 30 MEADDWDALE BEACH SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT VOL 5, PG• 42 SIR\/EY NOTES EQUIPMENT: 3' OR LE55 TOTAL STATION AND/OR GN55 NETWORK ROVER METHOD: FIELD TRAVERSE AND/OR WA5H]NGTON STATE REFERENCE NETWORK GN55 THE CLOSURES OF THI5 FIELD TRAVE95E CONDUCTED DURING THIS SURVEY MEET OR EXCEED THE. MINIMUM CLOSURE 5TANDARD5 STATED IN WAC 332-130-090. FIELD SURVEY DATES: 4-13-17, 4-17-17. 5-2-17 AND 5-3-17 SURVEYOR OLUNER/4PPL 11S 4NT MATTHEW 5CHNEIDERS, PL5 CARL & SHARON LARSEN 5205 5. 2ND AVE. W 15729 75TH PL. W EVERETT, WA 90203 EDMONDS, WA 913026 (425) 252-1004 (425) 340-6309 CQNT4CT JUSTIN PEDERSEN 5205 5. 2ND AVE. W EVERETT, WA 90203 (425) 252-1004 Packet Pg. 39 1.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Wassall Pedestrian Easement at the NE corner of 639 2nd Ave Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the June 18, 2019, consent agenda for Council approval. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed development project, the Wassall Single Family Residence. The project consists of demolition of the existing single family home and constructing a new single family home at the southwest corner of 2nd and Caspers St. Concrete sidewalks will be constructed on both 2nd Ave and on Caspers St. Existing conditions, including a catch basin, a storm manhole, and a large asphalt island (to prevent traffic from entering 2nd) all contribute to making a traditional corner sidewalk ADA ramp impossible. To address this, the sidewalk on 2nd Ave will curve slightly across private property and meet up with the Caspers St sidewalk at a point behind the ADA ramp (refer to Attachment 2). As noted, a portion of the sidewalk will be located on private property and therefore, a public pedestrian easement shall be provided to the City. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Wassall Pedestrian Easement Plan Packet Pg. 40 � ` City of Edmonds neap Title 101 rL,,'''• 62,1 �r JAI c.J 620 616 6 6p8 623 "06 613 601 S7S 33 723 0 co 301 715 CLI > Q v 209 GASPERS ST N CASTERS ST I ' 300 314 32 651 �4 N I N I 652 654 656 632 621 � 625 631 627 615 I - GILTNER EN 614 626 628 630 632 Oil 608 611 615 617 607 SATERlN 602 604 110 �v CD 0 0 534 547 602 ON M 1:2,257 0 Notes Legend 94.04 188.1 Feet This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accu 3_1984_Web Mercator_Auxiliary—Sphere current, or otherwise reli ity of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCT Q Packet Pg. 41 SW 1/4, NW 1/4, SECTION 24, TOWNSHII . ........... CONCRETE CURB 3"4 WORK ZONE CB RIM=3 A7.79 ?hW=,36.92 DI(E)=35-32 IE 6 "' DI(S)=35-36 CA SPESS S T. IE 6" 01( W)=34-0 VRAMP TO EXISTING CURB IALKWAY YD RIM=37.38 1E 61) DI(N)=35.58 OFCONC. WALL 0.7'(E) 14'(S) OF' PROPERTY :-R o SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN NOTES: 1. UTILITY PATCHES SHALL BE COMBINED AND FULL WIDTH OR HALF WIDTH OUT WILL BE REQUIRED DEPENDING ON THE EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE WHERE UTILITY PATCHES FALL ENTIRELY WITHIN ONE TRAVEL LANE THE OVERLAY SHALL EXTEND TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY. WHERE UTILITY PATCHES EXTEND INTO BOTH TRAVEL LANES A , FULL WIDTH OVERLAY IS At'QLAED- ' —A jj L iJ O DD - - - - - - - - - - - SECTION CHAIN LINK FE AND WOOD FENCE SOUTH OF PROPERTY LINE SECTION WOOD FENCE ?OPERTY CORNER FENCE END 0.8'(W) ANO OF- PROPERTY CORNER\ CAP ILLEGIBLE 1.2'(W) )F PROPERTY CORNER // WASHER ILLEGIBLE )OPERTY CORNER _,.. �_____ 3 NEW CURB, GUTTER, AND A - DEDICATE PROPERTY TO BACK OF SIDEWALK PROPOSED BUILDING FFE: 39.5 EX. HOUSE R33 SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1" = 107 N -CHIVE -GOV-L,,0T-2 SINGLE DIRECTION CURB RAMPS W/ DETECTABLEC 0 N C R E TL-----C4Vt? B WARNING SUOACE r4 5 L V FoNab,'ONC OM 3 BRASS 2 3 j NEV 3SSWAL;K1 17.53 I /m= IE 6 DI(NE) =34.73 IE 67 DI(0=34.73 IE 6' DI(1)=34.73 IE 8 RCP(S =34,58 50 NEW CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK r2 V —3 Cz) N� O rn F-r C) WORK ZONE ,/-3 4 TYPE V DRIVEWA!Y APPROACH ASPHALT PATCHI 2. �.C- S5 9 V I I -` UNIT 314 110N PIPE 0-2(�) PROPER TY "'ORNER IVI)OO FENCE .2 S) (F '(s) DR)OPERTY COR FIR fr 1706ND 4"X4' CONCI M( 4'RAMP TO 1/4 BRASS - 1- (JE 0 W EXISTING FEB UARY 18 10 0 5 10 20 R= M!E HOU, 1. 07Y It r= 2, FORMS q.L 1 EXPAN Jot C EXPAN Jot 5. EXPAN a J01 6. CoNCF 04 r- sw 7. FINISH CD v) L L I w 8. CURB " 0" 1 E 9, REMOL r ;EPL DIRECI L- 30 0 10. A 2—F LLj NIM1 z 11. CURBie G) rER 12, ALL V AL "Mom E U) m uj a. now y 2 S a. glplpqll E 0 (n m Lu (n a. (n (n E u E I Packet Pg. 42 1 1.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 10-ft Sanitary Sewer Easement along the west property boundary of 625 Alder Street Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Forward this item to the consent agenda for approval at the June 18, 2019 Council meeting. Narrative A public sanitary sewer main currently runs along the western boundary of 625 Alder Street. During review of a building permit for a single-family residential addition at this address, it was discovered that an easement did not exist for the public sewer main. A condition was placed on the building permit stating a public sanitary sewer easement shall be recorded against the property prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. Attachments: Draft Utility Easement Vicinity Map Packet Pg. 43 1.9.a Return Address City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Grantor(s): Paul Cathcart and Diane Ellis Grantee: City of Edmonds Abbreviated Legal: CITY OF EDMONDS BLK 095 D-00 - LOTS 33-34 Assessor's Property Tax Parcel No.: 00434209503300 UTILITY EASEMENT Property Address: 625 Alder St, Edmonds, WA 98020-3415 IN CONSIDERATION of benefits to accrue to the grantor(s) herein, the undersigned, Paul Cathcart and Diane Ellis, ("GRANTOR") hereby grant(s) to the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Municipal Corporation ("GRANTEE"), a permanent easement for the installation, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction and/or replacement of existing sewer main , over, across, through, and below the following described property, and the further right, at GRANTEE's sole expense, to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions thereon interfering with the location, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction and/or replacement of said existing sewer main , together with the right of access to the easement at any time for the stated purposes. The easement hereby granted is located in the COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON, and is more particularly described as the following property: LOTS 33 AND 34, BLOCK 95, CITY OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECRODED IN VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGE 39, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. The easement area is depicted in the drawing attached as Exhibit A. GRANTEE shall, at GRANTEE'S sole expense, be responsible for the maintenance, repair, replacement, removal, relocation and reconstruction of the systems. Further, GRANTEE agrees to restore to substantially the original condition such improvements as are disturbed during the construction, maintenance, and repair of said utility or utilities, provided GRANTOR, their heirs, or assigns shall not construct any permanent structure over, upon, or within the permanent easement. GRANTEE agrees to indemnify, defend and hold GRANTORO harmless from any and all liability or damage, including attorneys' fees and costs, incurred or arising directly from GRANTEE's use, maintenance, repair, replacement, removal, relocation and reconstruction of and access to the systems, except those arising from any of GRANTOR'S acts, omissions or negligence. GRANTOR expressly reserves all rights not inconsistent with those granted to GRANTEE herein. Each party shall reasonably cooperate with the other in the performance of their obligations stated herein and to affect the purposes of this Agreement DATED TH DA Fzn 20 -PauCathcart �of-- Accepted by the Citv Council dated d. 20 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: By Packet Pg. 44 1.9.a Q% Y y S- i-1 cd ^7 • ��y 0 .� Cd i CU �t n A � o a 40 Ch Cd w alb i-1 - U � U N Ct cd .S. Id 0 a3 N N cn U m Y 7-i O =1 Packet Pg. 45 1.9.a a� m L rt+ L Q LO N C E d N R W L 3 as Cn �a �a Cn 0 c 0 An m c m E m �a w r �a L E ci Q Packet Pg. 46 " City of Edmonds Vicinity Map 120 �I _o dial - ::ter r w e ■h\'�[I FE, ilf w=51EE�-� E13 1 - - 1 A�I��J■i7 601 r j�q •■■[17ip :i7 E �.JLJL�Jw II L M. o �1��� 1 415�. 425 L r riTi1��■Ilima r� L7 �1• � :{ • ■i 0 188.08 376.2 Feet This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurz WGS 1984 Web Mercator_ Auxiliary —Sphere current, or otherwise reliat © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTI( Moumiaw Legend Notes Attachment 1 Packet Pg. 47 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Presentation of a Supplemental Agreement with Parametrix for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Staff Lead: Phil Williams Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On July 28, 2015, Council unanimously moves to emphasize and prioritize near term solutions for waterfront access. On October 20, 2015, Council unanimously authorized a Professional Services Agreement with Tetra Tech for the Edmonds Waterfront Analysis Project, the precursor to the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Project. On November 15, 2016, Council unanimously moved to add the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Project to the CIP. On December 5, 2017, Council authorized a Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix for Pre - Design activities regarding the Project. On April 4, 2018, staff presented an update on project progress. On August 28, 2018, staff presented an update on project progress. On September 18, 2018, a Public Hearing on the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector was held. Staff Recommendation Forward this item for a presentation to the City Council at the June 18th City Council meeting. Narrative Since the approval to move forward with the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector was made in November 2017, the City and its team of consultants lead by Parametrix has coordinated closely with Edmonds residents over the scope and scale of the Connector. Through several open houses, neighborhood meetings, and online outreach, residents evaluated several options and styles to ultimately select the preferred alternative from which to move forward into formal design and permitting. In parallel with those efforts, the City team has also met with several resource agencies that have jurisdiction over many of the environmental permits that will be required for construction, including the Packet Pg. 48 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Ecology, the Recreation and Conservation Office, and the Army Corps of Engineers. The City has also reached out to the natural and cultural resource staff of nine local Tribes that may have an interest in the project. BNSF has also worked closely with the City in order to establish some key design parameters in the Connector. Such early contacts are helpful in assessing permitting, regulatory, and environmental requirements, and avoiding expensive surprises later on. The City has also worked very closely with our national leaders regarding the Connector, and have received strong support from Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, as well as from Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Rick Larsen, Suzan Delbene, and Derek Kilmer. The Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector has received strong support from neighboring stakeholder agencies, including BNSF, Community Transit, Sound Transit, and the Port of Edmonds, whom together have already contributed $230,000 towards the study and planning phases of the project. The Port of Edmonds, in fact, has also pledged an additional $1,500,000 towards the construction costs of the Connector. The strongest funding support has come from the State of Washington, which in addition to the $1,200,000 committed to the past study and planning phases, has made available an additional $7,050,000 to the project. Funds already committed to the Connector project will fully fund the design and permitting phases scoped in the Parametrix contract, with no additional funds required from the City. Parametrix has submitted a comprehensive scope of services for the work involved. The consultant is prepared to begin Phase 2 of the scope of work to complete the 60% design, develop the environmental documents and prepare long -lead permit applications. This phase is anticipated to be completed in eleven months. The professional services fee for phase 2 is $2,353,134 and includes a $150,000 management reserve. The total fee for the entire supplement (phases 2, 3 and 4) is $4,091,473. A $350,000 management reserve is included for unanticipated activities not covered in the scope, to be used only by City direction. Attached are the proposed scope of work and summary fee schedule. Attachments: Parametrix - Draft Scope of Work Parametrix - Draft Summary Fee Matrix Packet Pg. 49 1.10.a Parametrix ENGINEERING. PLANNING. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK AMENDMENT 4 City of Edmonds Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Phases 2-4 The previous scopes of work for Amendments 1-3 (Phase 1) included the development of alternatives, preliminary engineering design and support for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector from Sunset Avenue to touchdown point. It was determined through the development of the preliminary engineering that more information was needed prior to completing the environmental documentation. Therefore the environmental documentation budget from phase 1 was used for the development and running of the live turning test with fire trucks, the conceptual BNSF submittal, permitting and fish forage surveys for geotechnical work, additional survey of the park and geotechnical borings and Ordinary High Water Mark, and additional Advisory Committee and City Council meetings. This Amendment 4 scope of work covers the evaluation and final design for the preferred (hybrid) alternative for the Waterfront Connector approved by City Council on October 23, 2018 in three phases: From Preliminary design to 30% and 60% Design (Phase 2) From 60% to 90% Design (Phase 3) From 90% to 100% and Final Design (Phases 4) Phase 2 This Scope of Work provides for professional services to 30% and 60% design, development of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental documentation, development for the completion of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and long -lead permit applications for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector. Phase 3: This Scope of Work provides for professional services to 90% design, as well as development of permit applications Phase 4: This Scope of Work provides for professional services to Final design Phase 2: 30% and 60% TASK 201 — PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Consultant shall manage scope, schedule, budget, and execution of this amendment. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 1 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 50 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 201.1 — Project Management Plan The Consultant shall update the Project Management Plan (PMP) that defines the framework under which the project will be managed through all phases, including risk, change, communications, schedule, scope, and budget control through Final Design.. Task 201.2 — Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings The original scope of work included Monthly PMT Meetings. For this amendment, the Consultant shall continue to participate in weekly meetings as needed for project management updates/design decisions, and prepare a brief meeting summary for each meeting, focused on key decisions and assigned action items. These meetings will be the forum for the City of Edmonds (City) to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. The meetings will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals, and develop potential solutions to design issues. Task 201.3 — Subconsultant Coordination The Consultant shall prepare and execute additional Subconsultant agreements and review and submit additional invoices. Task 201.4 — Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination The Consultant shall conduct additional internal consultant project coordination meetings to execute the project Task 201.5 — Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports The Consultant shall prepare and submit monthly invoice and progress reports. Task 201.6 — Quality Assurance The Consultant shall conduct additional quality control reviews on additional design materials. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Project planning is assumed for the project through final Design. • Meetings, coordination, progress reports and quality assurance assumed for phase 2 work. 0 Phase 2 is assumed from July 1, 2019 through May 30, 2020 (11 months) Meetings 40 weekly PMT meetings (35 on the phone, and 5 in person) • 24 internal team meetings • 12 meetings with subconsultants City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 2 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 51 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Updated Project Management Plan • Invoices and progress reports. • Updated schedules. • PMT Meeting Action Items TASK 202 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Task 202.1 — Public Involvement and Communications Plan (30%-60% task only) The Consultant will update the public involvement and communications plan to reflect outreach efforts through final design. As part of the plan updates, the public involvement and communications plan will be shared with the City of Edmonds Diversity Commission. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final updated public involvement and communications plan. Task 202.2 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up Events The Consultant will research, plan, and staff eight informational booths at local events(i.e., Edmonds Farmer's Market, Art Walk Edmonds, Taste Edmonds, Marina Beach Cleanup, Oktoberfest) and pop-up tabling events (i.e., park, library) as the team works toward 60% design. These events will be aimed at sharing information on the update design and gathering feedback from the broader community and park users on design details. Following the events, the Consultant will prepare a high-level summary. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Existing project materials (i.e., fact sheet, frequently asked questions [FAQ]) will be used to support informational booths. • Consultant will coordinate logistics, be responsible for table/booth set-up, and provide one staff from PMX and one from Envirolssues for each event. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final summer/fall tabling plan. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 3 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 52 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Staffing and set-up of eight information tables and/or pop-up events for up to eight hours per event. • One draft and one final spring/summer tabling effort summary. Task 202.3 Public Open House Meetings (2) / Online Open Houses (2) The Consultant will schedule, coordinate, staff, and provide materials for two public open house meeting at or before the 30% and 60% design milestone, depending upon the needs of the design team, to share information with and gather feedback from the community. For each meeting, the Consultant will coordinate logistics, develop a meeting plan, staff, facilitate, and summarize the meeting. In conjunction with the in -person open house meetings, the Consultant will develop an online open house to share the same content that will be displayed at each public meeting and to solicit community feedback online. The online open house will include use of a custom sub -domain website that will be seamlessly linked from the City's website, project -specific customized layout, station tabs to match in -person meeting station materials, fully responsive design (i.e., for smart phones, tablets), and integration with Google Translate and social share. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will provide up to two staff from Envirolssues, one from Tetra Tech, and one from PMX for each meeting, including facilitation and presentation support. Architect attendance under Task 205. Artist attendance under task 207. • Content developed for public meetings will be used to populate the online open house. Materials and messaging development under Task 202.5. • City will pay for room rentals. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Coordination for and staff support and/or facilitation at two public meetings. • Two draft and two final meeting plans. • Two draft and two final meeting agendas. • Two draft and two final sets of supporting meeting documents (i.e., comment forms, sign -in sheets, directional signage, name tags). • Two online open houses. • Two draft and two final meeting summaries (includes both in -person and online). City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 4 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 53 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 202.4 Property Owner Briefings The Consultant will schedule and conduct four briefings with property owners in the project area at or before the 30% and 60% design milestones, depending upon the needs of the design team. Briefings will be designed to share updates to the project design and schedule, and to solicit input and feedback on project design elements and on anticipated construction impacts. The Consultant will schedule the meetings and document input received during the briefings. Meetings will be conducted with small groups, including property owners on Sunset Avenue N, and on Edmonds Street between Sunset Avenue N and 3rd Avenue N. Property owners will be notified of the meetings via direct mail to the street addresses. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Existing project materials or materials developed by the technical team will be used at the briefings. • Consultant will provide one Envirolssues and one PMX support staff for each briefing. A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Scheduling and attendance at four briefings. • Two draft and two final briefing plans. • Two draft and two final materials packets (graphics/materials to be supplied by the City and technical team). • Two draft and Two final briefing key takeaway summaries with attendance, date of meeting, and key points discussed. Task 202.5 Materials The Consultant will develop content and graphic design for project materials, email updates, and website content. Project materials may include the development of one folio/fact sheet, updates to the project FAQ one traveling display, meeting notifications, Sunset neighborhood letters, media releases, utility bill inserts, and up to 24 display boards for the public meetings. Meeting notifications will likely include one poster, one flier, email updates, social media posts, and display ads for each meeting. A letter will be sent to the Sunset Avenue project neighbors to notify them of the property owner briefings. The Consultant will also prepare twelve monthly email updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will coordinate printing of materials (e.g., display ads, display boards, etc.). Consultant will distribute posters, fliers to local businesses, and traveling display to City -approved locations. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 5 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 54 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Consultant will coordinate and send monthly email updates to project listserv. • Consultant will coordinate mailing of Sunset neighborhood letter. • Consultant will coordinate language translations for materials in Spanish, Korean, and simplified Chinese • City will post notifications to social media and City -managed project website. • City will be responsible for media relations. • City will pay for costs associated with display ads. • City will share project messages and produced materials with key project partners, such as the Port of Edmonds, for inclusion in their communication materials. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final fact sheet/folio. • Two draft and two final FAQ sheet updates. • Two draft and two final utility bill inserts. • One draft and one final traveling display board. • 24 draft and 24 final meeting display boards. • Two draft and two final meeting posters. • Two draft and two final meeting fliers. • Two draft and two final print display ads. • Two draft and two final online display ads. • Two draft and two final Sunset neighborhood letter. • Monthly content updates for project website. • Twelve draft and twelve final email updates. Task 202.6 Communication Tracking and Comment Management Consultant will monitor the project email inbox, forward comments to the project team, provide draft responses when needed, and track incoming and outgoing project correspondence. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will send responses back to community members. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 6 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 55 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Communication responses, as needed. • Email files of saved project correspondence or PDF of all email correspondence. TASK 203 — STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION Additional communication with Stakeholders is required for design to progress to 30 and 60%. Public Art Design Commission meetings are accounted for under task 205 for Phase 2. Task 203.1 — Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan Update the Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Task 203.2 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coordination The Consultant shall prepare for and participate in phone -call coordination and two meetings with the resource agencies for identification of mitigation opportunities, mitigation requirements and design, and permitting. The Consultant shall develop information for the meetings and provide follow-up information as requested. Meetings Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings: o Number of meetings: Two (2) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) PMX, o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Additional meetings with the resource agencies are included in Task 214.10 Task 203.3 BNSF Meetings This task assumes two plan review meetings with BNSF at the 30% design submittal / review and six additional meetings to discuss project design needs, construction easements, permanent easements, and agreements for a total of eight meetings. Exhibits and legal descriptions are developed under Task 204.3. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Eight additional coordination meetings with BNSF. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 7 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 56 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Meetings BNSF Meetings: o Number of meetings: Eight (8) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: BNSF Seattle o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, 1 TKDA, 2 Tierra ROW (for two meetings only. PM and Agent for one meeting, PM only for second meeting) o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Agendas and meeting minutes. Task 203.4 BNSF Design Coordination and Agreement Development The original scope of work for this task includes coordinating with BNSF to obtain design as -built information, access to BNSF property for survey and geotechnical information, and obtain agreement needs information to support those processes in the future: • Coordinate survey and geotechnical access to railroad property (if needed). • TKDA Preliminary design plan and constructability review (rail). • Develop crossing agreements (what -to -expect discussions). • Construction cost estimate support (identify costs that BNSF may charge the City). The above work is continuing through 2019 under the original scope of work, however 10,000 of fee is added to replenish fee that was used for additional graphics. This task adds the development of the draft Construction/ Maintenance Agreement, which includes development of the Temporary Construction Easement and the Aerial Permanent Easement. This agreement will include agreement for BNSF to design and construct the second signal if necessary and project flagging. The Consultant will develop estimates that BNSF may charge to the project. The Consultant shall review existing permits, easements, and franchise agreements and update said documents to current conditions. Upon completion of the updates, Consultant will rerecord easements with BNSF. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Draft Construction/ Maintenance Agreement. • Estimates for work that BNSF may charge the project. • Updated easements. • Construction easements. • Aerial Permanent easement. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 8 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 57 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 203.5 BNSF 30% Submittal The Consultant shall develop a 30% Submittal package for BNSF review and comment. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The Consultant 30% Design plans submitted to BNSF shall meet the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation projects, May 2016. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Response to Conceptual Design Comments. • Design Plans showing a Plan View, Elevation View, Typical Section, Construction Notes, and railroad profile grade diagram. Plans to indicate structure design criteria and construction methods (developed under Task 209). • Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements (developed under Task 209). • Drainage Report and design plans conforming to BNSF grade separation and construction guidelines (developed under Task 209). • Construction Phasing Plans showing all required phasing, construction procedures, temporary shoring layout, controlling dimensions and elevations (developed under Task 209). • Conduct sight distance analysis to see if our bridge obstructs sight lines to the proposed signal after BNSF adds a second track. BNSF will complete the design and construction a supplemental signal if needed. The Consultant will develop a draft estimate for negotiation for the cost to BNSF for that design and construction. • Includes review by TKDA. Task 203.6 Tribes Meetings This scope includes up to 6 meetings with the tribes to re-establish communication on the preferred alternative concept and to explore opportunities for mitigating environmental impacts. Tribes to coordinate with include Muckleshoot, Snoqualmie, Stillaguamish, Suquamish and Tulalip Tribes. Tribe members will also be invited to environmental resource agency meetings. Meetings Tribal Meetings: o Number of meetings: Six (6) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: Tribes locale City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 9 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 58 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX. participation by VIA and Myers Sculpture is provided for in tasks 205 and 207. o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes Task 203.7 Agency Stakeholder Meetings Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • One Additional Advisory Committee meeting through 60% design. Advisory Committee Meeting to include the Parks Department, BNSF, Community Transit, Port of Edmonds, WSF, and possibly residents from Mayor's Advisory Committee. • WSDOT and WSF meetings effort will include the development of a draft operations plan. • South County Fire and Rescue, two meetings to review bollard design and operation (two staff members from Parametrix). Meetings • Advisory Committee meeting: o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 1 PMX, 1 Tt o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • WSDOT/ WSF meeting: o Number of meetings: Three (3) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: Two (2) at WSDOT Dayton Ave, and One (1) WSF o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Meetings • South County Fire and Rescue meetings: o Number of meetings: Two (2) o Length of each meeting: One (1) hour o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 10 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 59 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables: Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes. • Draft Operations Plan Task 203.8 City Council Briefings The Consultant shall prepare and conduct presentations, in support of City Staff, briefing the City Council on the project status and key design topics. This task provides for four meetings with City Council for design and cost estimate updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Four meetings with City Council. It is assumed two of the meetings will take place approaching 30%, and two approaching 60% design Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Presentation materials. Task 203.9 — Technical Committee Meetings This task includes preparing for and participating in two technical design committee meetings that include City Public Works, Parks & Recreation, utilities, and planning to provide input to the design. Assumes one meeting at the 30% level and one at the 60% level to take place in Edmonds. Art Commission meetings are provided for under task 207. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Two meetings at City Hall. Three (3) staff from Parametrix will attend. VIA'S participate under task 205 Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Agendas and meeting minutes City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 11 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 60 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 203.10 — Participate in Meetings with the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) Participate in one meeting with RCO to demonstrate the project attributes and obtain feedback. It is assumed this meeting will take place at the RCO office and will be attended by two Parametrix staff. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Agendas and meeting minutes. TASK 204 — SURVEY AND BASEMAP Task 204.1 — Existing Conditions Survey Provide additional survey within park, parking lot, critical areas, and as -built of rail 1500 feet in advance of bridge to determine sight lines. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Revised base map with expanded limits. Task 204.2 — Right of Way and Boundary Research This task includes obtaining additional easements from BNSF, reviewing existing language and proposing revised language to update (see Tasks 203.3,203.4, 203.5for all BNSF coordination with this work). Copies of nine existing easements have been requested from BNSF. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Review of nine easements. Tierra assist in review • Proposed revisions of three easements. Tierra assists in drafting of revisions. • Two negotiation rounds with BNSF. • Meetings with BNSF assumed in Task 203.3. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Draft easement language. Task 204.3 — Exhibits and Legal Description for Property Needs This task includes the development of exhibits and legal descriptions for property needs, including: • Two properties on Sunset Avenue (construction permits). • Two temporary construction easements with BNSF. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 12 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 61 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • One permanent easement over BNSF. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Five exhibits and five legal descriptions. TASK 205.0 - ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) 30% AND 60% Architectural services incudes developing the architectural themes and elements, stakeholder coordination and open houses to obtain input. Work to date has not included restroom design. Task 205.1 — 30% Design This Amendment 4 provides for: • Design team meetings and coordination through 30%. o Up to six in person design team coordination meetings with engineering and other consultants. o Up to six additional phone coordination meetings. • Support for presentations and technical meetings with the city and agencies through 30%. o Attendance at up to two meetings in person. o Support up to two additional meetings by phone. o Written response as required to City and outside agency comments for no more than ten (10) total meetings. • Support for one public meeting; ■ Visual graphics presenting the Hybrid Design (listed below) with a focus on throw barrier and guardrail details. ■ Board layout and PowerPoint for public meeting. ■ Two staff present at public meeting to provide verbal presentation and answer questions. ■ Up to two meetings by phone to coordinate presentation. ■ 3D computer animation model for visual fly through. • Graphics for the Hybrid Design: o Five views rendered with context which are an aerial view, a view from Sunset looking north, a view from the waterfront path looking north, a view from the end of Brackett's Landing jetty, and a view from the water. • Rendered plan graphic for presentations, etc. Collaboration with the engineering team to develop a revised architectural approach that meets the City's needs for function, cost, and integration with the site to 30% design. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 13 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 62 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Urban design integration at the restroom plaza and turnaround and at the raised intersection on Sunset Avenue, detailed further in the Urban Design/Park Integration task . • 30% Design Drawings: o Lighting concept. o Preliminary throw barrier, crash rail, and hand rail sections. o Seating areas. o Plan including plaza and raised intersection plans. o Preliminary bridge elevations. o Restroom plan. o Specification outline. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • No physical models will be produced. • Proposed hybrid design will require architectural and engineering refinement and coordination, but will not face significant changes due to city or agency comments or other factors. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Graphics for the preferred alternative as described above. • Fly through animation • 30% Design Drawings as outlined above. • An outline of specifications. Task 205.2 — 60% Design This Amendment 4 provides for: • Design team meetings and coordination through 60%: o Up to three in person design team coordination meetings with engineering and other consultants. o Up to three additional phone coordination meetings. • Support for presentations and meetings to the City and agencies through 60%: o Attendance at up to two meetings in person. o Support at up to two additional meetings by phone. o Response as required to City and outside agency comments for no more than six total meetings • Support for one public meeting: City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 14 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 63 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Updates to visual graphics developed through 60% Design. o Board layout and PowerPoint for public meeting. o Two staff present at public meeting to provide verbal presentation and answer questions. o Up to two meetings by phone to coordinate presentation. 0 3D computer animation model for coordination with engineering and visual fly through • Collaboration with the engineering team to develop a revised architectural approach that meets the City's needs for function, cost, and integration with the site to 60% design. • 60% Design Drawings: o Lighting design. o Throw barrier, crash rail, hand rail sections, and details. o Seating areas. o Refined plan including plaza and raised intersection plans. o Refined bridge elevations. o Restroom plans, elevations, roof plan, and lighting plan. • Other coordination items: o Input and coordination for cost estimate 0 60% Draft specifications. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Cost estimate not completed by the architect, but support is provided. This includes review of all items related to the architecture and urban design elements as well as coordination of quantities, etc. • Visual graphics provided for the 60% Open House will be updates to the views developed for the end of 30% design. No changes will be made to view points and no new views will be added. • Animation fly through will be an update of the fly through provided at the end of 30% design. Travel path and viewpoints will remain the same. • No physical models will be produced. • Structural type, depth, and configuration are set at the beginning of this task. Any changes after completion of 30% would require additional design scope. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Updates to renderings and graphic plan as outlined in Task 205.1— 30% Design. • Updates to fly through animation. • 60% Design Drawings as outlined above. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 15 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 64 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • 60% Preliminary specifications. TASK 206.0 — Urban Design/ Park Integration (VIA) The original scope of work included the development of options at Sunset Avenue North and Brackett's Landing Park that integrate the bridge landing into the surrounding pedestrian pathways and landscape, restroom location/ space planning. This amendment provides for relocating and designing the restroom and outdoor shower facilities and developing the park / bridge integration to 30% and 60% which includes: • Restroom design and integration with landing plaza. • Turnaround surface and transitions. • Integration of the bridge into the existing waterfront path. • Integration of native vegetation. • Integration of the bridge path with the bike/pedestrian path along Sunset Avenue. • Placemaking at the raised intersection and pedestrian crossing of Sunset Avenue. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Close coordination and collaboration with team on civil, environmental, and stormwater issues. • Accurate geotechnical reports and survey will be provided for accurate design. • Although 3D computer model maybe used to study detail elements of the design, no visual graphics will be provided other than plans, sections, elevations and details needed for 30% and 60% Design Drawings as outlined above and in Task 206 • No physical models will be produced. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • 30% and 60% drawings (refer to Task 205) including: o Plans, sections, and details. TASK 207.0 — ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION 30% AND 60% This work includes the integration of art and related creative processes into the overall design of the bridge architecture, approaches, site integration, cultural and interpretive way finding, and participation in the relevant public and stakeholder outreach development and programs.. This work includes: 30% Design • Up to six in person meetings for art integration. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 16 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 65 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Up to six additional phone coordination meetings • Up to one meeting with the Public Art Design Commission (One PMX, One Myers Sculpture, one VIA • Up to six in person meetings with tribes for cultural integration. • One Open House 30% • Detailed integration with the bridge elements such as handrail, deck surface, land bridge, etc. • Detailed integration with the restroom and plaza design. • Incorporation in seating areas, etc. • Integration in place making at Sunset Avenue. • Incorporation in to moments of discovery where the structure meets the beach walk. • Coordination with functional systems including stormwater, wayfinding, and cultural and historical placemaking. This work includes: 60% Design • Up to three in person meetings for art integration. • Up to three additional phone coordination meetings • Up to one meeting with the Public Art Design Commission • Up to six in person meetings with tribes for cultural integration. • One Open House 60% • Detailed integration with the bridge elements such as handrail, deck surface, land bridge, etc. • Detailed integration with the restroom and plaza design. • Incorporation in seating areas, etc. • Integration in place making at Sunset Avenue. • Incorporation in to moments of discovery where the structure meets the beach walk. • Coordination with functional systems including stormwater, wayfinding, and cultural and historical placemaking. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Close collaboration between artist, architectural team and City Parks personnel will be very important for the enhancement of an integrated concept delivery to 60% design. • All meetings for art coordination will be included in the count for team meetings outlined in Task 205. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 17 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 66 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Integration of the art plan and any needed details or attachments into 30% and 60% drawings. • Presentations for Design Commission TASK 208 — GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR 30% DESIGN (S&W) Task 208.1 — Geotechnical analysis for Preferred Alternative (S&W) Under 30% design, the geotechnical consultant shall: • Attend up to one meeting in person to discuss design elements and/or constructability and participate in conference calls as needed to address geotechnical aspects of the project. • Revise axial capacity analyses for alternative foundation dimensions for the approach bridge. • Provide tieback recommendations and evaluated stability for an east abutment alternative not founded on deep foundations. • Monitor groundwater conditions during wet weather winter months in previously installed groundwater monitoring devices using data loggers to obtain readings over a minimum 2-week period. • Develop a groundwater model of the project site and adjacent area to improve understanding of how the identified artesian conditions affect project foundation alternatives. • Develop geotechnical mitigations for unfavorable underground conditions, such as liquefaction and lateral spreading. • Prepare geotechnical recommendations for the proposed restroom including: o IBC seismic design criteria o Foundation design parameters • Update the draft geotechnical report to present new analysis results and related recommendations Foundation soil springs or P-Y curves, potential liquefaction assessment and mitigation recommendations, and negative skin friction data. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The project alternative advanced for 30% design is not significantly changed from that assumed for the previous work authorization. • Bathymetry information for conditions offshore and survey information on land are provided by others. • No additional field explorations will be performed. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 18 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 67 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Updated 30% Draft Geotechnical Report, submitted electronically. TASK 209 - 30% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE This task includes developing 30% design of the preferred alternative. Task 209.1 — Basis of Design Update the Basis of Design document to reflect the latest designs to 30% Task 209.2 — 30% Engineering for the Preferred Alternative This task is to advance the civil, structural, and traffic management designs to a 30% level, which will define alignment and profiles, major structural dimensions and layouts, traffic phases, etc., with sufficient analysis and design detail for determining temporary and permanent site and environmental effects and benefits. Updating Design Criteria • Updating the design criteria from Phase 1 — draft for City to review and approval. • Provide response to City's review comments. Engineering Design and Plan Development Civil engineering and traffic management designs includes: • Horizontal Alignment and Vertical Profile of the crossing and approach structures • Title sheet and Vicinity Map • Summary of Quantities • Alignment, Right -of -Way and Survey Control Plans. • Site Preparation Plans • TESC Plans and Details • Intersection layouts • Sunset Avenue intersection improvements • Grading section and contour plans • Pavement Marking and Signing Plans • Project footprint and earthwork quantities • Typical roadway sections City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 19 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 68 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Bollard requirements and layouts • Mixing zone/parking lot layouts and details (Via and PMX). • Beach mitigations. • Maintenance of traffic (including railroads). • Traffic control plans during construction • Stormwater designs for conveyance and water quality treatment. (Tt) • Drainage Report conforming to City stormwater standards, including the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. Provide submittal for BNSF 30% submittal meeting BNSF grade separation guidelines (Tt) • Utility relocation, replacement, and protection. (Tt) • Roadway profile plans • Paving plans • Drainage plan • Fencing plan • Railroad profile grade diagram -vertical and horizontal clearances • Landscaping plans • Provide response to 30% review comments Structural designs include: • Structural analysis to determine the span layout and superstructure sizes and shapes. • Structural analysis to determine the shapes and sizes of piers and abutments. • Structural analysis for the foundation types and the sizes/depths. • Seismic design dynamic model analysis. • Constructability assessment, including consideration for Artesian Water pressure effects. • Develop Construction Notes. • Assessment of construction restrictions due to BNSF operation restrictions. • Art elements including a meeting with the City. • Update span layouts. • Design of bridge deck and overlay material, thickness. • Design of girder type and typical sections • Design of column size and shape. • Design of foundation size and type. • Design of structural details of sidewalk, barrier, railing, etc. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 20 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 69 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Design of bridge illumination (architect support for type, Tt for design) and attachments • Design of bridge abutment and wingwalls • Design of retaining walls and structural walls • Sunset Avenue slope stabilization (Geotech support) • Construction access and staging • Construction Phasing studies include anticipated phasing, construction procedures, temporary structure layout, controlling dimensions, and elevations. • Ground improvement (if required)(Geotech Support). • Identify Technology for bollard operation. (including review of bullyboy.co.nz) • Provide response to 30% review comments Restroom • New restroom layout (VIA under task 205) and utility connections.(Tt) • Structural Design (PMx) • Mechanical, electrical (Tt) Technical Specifications (Special Provisions) • Outlines of Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements. (railroad specific) • Provide response to review comments • Prepare sketches and figures to be included as part of permitting package. Architectural and artistic effort provided for under tasks 205 and 207 Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The design shall meet the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation projects, May 2016, unless otherwise agreed in writing between BNSF and the City. • The design will be based on the preliminary engineering design that was developed in coordination with the City and submitted to the City and to BNSF (as a conceptual design). BNSF comments on the conceptual submittal were minimal, except for the comment stating BNSF may want to increase track centers. That may require the abutment design to be crash worthy. It is assumed no other major changes are required. • The City shall provide review comments in a single consolidated file. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 21 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 70 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Artesian water pressure may change the foundation design. Outreach to contractors specializing in constructability with artesian water pressure may require foundation design requirements, resulting in additional scope and budget. Meetings • Basis of Design review meeting: o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, 1 Tt o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Design review meetings (30%): o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, 1 VIA (under task x) and 1 Tt o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Utility Coordination meetings (30%): o Number of meetings: 2 o Length of each meeting: 1.5 hours o Location of the meetings: at the City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 1 PMX and 2 Tetra Tech o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Meetings with BNSF are provided for under task 203.3 Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Basis of Design — Draft • Design Criteria - draft. • 30% Design Plans (in electronic .pdf). • 30% specifications that also meet the requirement for BNSF submittal in Task 203. • Meeting notes with BNSF and other stakeholders. • 30% cost estimate (prepared under Task 217.1). • Draft construction schedule. (prepared under Task 217.1). • Written responses to City's consolidated review comments City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 22 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 71 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) TASK 210 — 60% GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The purpose of this task is to support the design team in developing the 60% design levels. Under 60% design, the geotechnical consultant shall: • Attend up to one meeting in person to discuss design elements and/or constructability and participate in conference calls as needed to address geotechnical aspects of the project. • Update geotechnical calculations for the project based on design revisions. • Participate in a constructability meeting with the design team and contractors to evaluate construction of drilled shafts under artesian groundwater conditions. • Use groundwater model developed under 30% design to evaluate the feasibility of dewatering to facilitate shaft installation. Associated with this task, the geotechnical consultant will perform up to three additional grain size analyses on soils collected from previous explorations. • Update the draft geotechnical report to present new or revised analysis results and related recommendations as well as provide construction considerations. • Review and edit draft plans and specifications for geotechnical considerations relating to drilled shafts, foundations, piles, spread footing foundations, and retaining walls. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The foundation options advanced for 60% design are not significantly changed from those assumed for 30% design. • No additional field explorations will be performed. • Preparation of project plans is not included in the geotechnical scope. • Geotechnical support for specifications will include reviewing and editing specifications prepared by others for inclusion of geotechnical considerations. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Updated 60% Draft Geotechnical Report, submitted electronically (.pdf). • Review comments. TASK 211 — 60% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Task 211.1 — Basis of Design Update the Basis of Design document to reflect the latest designs for 60%. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 23 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 72 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 211.2 — Development of 60% Design This task is to advance the civil, structural, and traffic management designs to 60% level, which will provide sufficient analysis and design detail for intermediate level of designs, and cost estimate. Updating Design Criteria • Updating the design criteria from 30% to 60% for City to review and approval. • Incorporate mutually agreed 30% review comments. • Provide response to City's review comments on 60% submittal. Engineering Design and Plan Development Civil engineering and traffic management designs includes updating the following design to 60% level • Horizontal Alignment and Vertical Profile of the crossing and approach structures Vicinity map Summary of quantities • Alignment, Right -of -Way and Survey Control Plans • Site Preparation Plans • TESC Plans and Details • Intersection layouts • Sunset Avenue intersection improvements • Grading section and contour plans • Pavement marking and signing plan, including channelization for railroad avenue for no blockages • Project footprint and earthwork quantities • Typical roadway sections • Bollard requirements and layouts • Mixing zone/parking lot layouts and details (Via and PMX) • Beach mitigations • Maintenance of traffic (including railroads) • Traffic control plans during construction • Stormwater designs for conveyance and water quality treatment (Tt) • Drainage Report conforming to City stormwater standards, including the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum (Tt) • Utility relocation, replacement, and protection, including extensions through Brackett's Landing North parking lot to Main Street (Tt) • New restroom layout (Via) and utility connections (Tt). • Roadway profile plans • Paving Plans • Drainage Plan • Fencing Plan • Railroad profile grade diagram —vertical and horizontal clearances • Landscaping plans City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 24 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 73 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Provide response to 60% review comments Structural designs include updating the following design to 60% level: • Structural analysis to determine the span layout and superstructure sizes and shapes. • Structural analysis to determine the shapes and sizes of piers and abutments. • Structural analysis for the foundation types and the sizes/depths. • Seismic design dynamic model analysis. • Constructability assessment, including consideration for Artesian Water pressure effects. • Develop Construction Notes. • Assessment of construction restrictions due to BNSF operation restrictions. • Art elements including a meeting with the City. • Update span layouts. • Design of bridge deck and overlay material, thickness. • Design of girder type and typical sections • Design of column size and shape. • Design of foundation size and type. • Design of structural details of sidewalk, barrier, railing, etc. • Design of bridge illumination (architect support) (and Tt) and attachments • Design of bridge abutment and wingwalls • Design of retaining walls and structural walls • Sunset Avenue slope stabilization (Geotech support) • Construction access and staging • Construction Phasing studies include anticipated phasing, construction procedures, temporary structure layout, controlling dimensions, and elevations. • Ground improvement (if required)(Geotech Support). • Identify Technology for bollard operation. (including review of bullyboy.co.nz) • Provide response to 60% review comments Restroom • New restroom layout (VIA under task 205) and utility connections.(Tt) • Structural Design (PMx) • Mechanical, electrical (Tt) City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 25 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 74 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Technical Specifications (Special Provisions) updating the following technical specification input to 60% level • Enhanced outlines of Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements. (railroad specific) • Incorporate mutually agreed 30% review comments. • Provide response to review comments • Update sketches and figures to be included as part of permitting package. Architectural and artistic effort provided for under tasks 205 and 207 Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The design shall meet the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation projects, May 2016, unless otherwise agreed in writing between BNSF and the City. • The City shall provide review comments in a single consolidated file • Revisions to address 60% review comments will be provided before the 90% design submittal • Artesian water pressure may change the foundation design. Outreach to contractors specializing in constructability with artesian water pressure may require foundation design requirements, resulting in additional scope and budget Meetings • Basis of Design review meeting: o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) PMX, One (1) Tt, One (1) Via o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Design review meetings (60%): o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Three (3) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Three (3) PMX, One (1) Tt (Via's attendance is provided for under task 205) o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • BNSF Coordination meetings (60%): to take place under task 203 • Utility Coordination meetings (60%): o Number of meetings: 1 o Length of each meeting: 2 hours City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 26 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 75 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Location of the meetings: City Hall o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: one (1) PMX, One (1) (Tetra Tech) o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Technical specification Input meetings (60%): o Number of meetings: One (1) meeting o Length of each meeting: 2 hours o Location of the meetings: Edmonds City Hall o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) PMX, One (1) Tetra Tech o Prepare meeting agenda: Yes/no o Prepare meeting follow up documents (Meeting summaries, etc.): Yes Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Design Criteria — updated. • 60% Design Plans (in electronic .pdf). 0 60% cost estimate (prepared under Task 217.2) • 60% specifications meet the requirement for BNSF submittal in Task 203. • Updated draft construction schedule. • Meeting notes with stakeholders. • Written responses to City's consolidated 60% review comments TASK 214 - ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION The purpose of this task is to prepare environmental documentation in support of all phases of design. Environmental documentation is intended to address compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act, and Section 6(f) of the U.S. Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. This scope of work also includes the development of an application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, a Critical Areas Study, Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (DARPA). Development of application materials and documentation to support issuance of permits from the City, such as a clearing and grading and building permit, will be completed under a separate scope of work. Task 214.1 — Verification of Requirements Upon selection of the Preferred Alternative, the Consultant shall coordinate with the City to confirm lead agency status. For the purpose of the environmental scope of work, it is assumed that the project will trigger NEPA by City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 27 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 76 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) requiring a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) but could also benefit from federal transportation funding through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). After lead agency determination, the Consultant shall develop a brief technical memorandum with an overview of the key environmental elements and recommendations regarding the appropriate level of documentation under NEPA, SEPA, ESA, Section 106, Section 4(f), and Section 6(f) for consideration by the City of Edmonds and other agencies as appropriate. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The level of documentation will be as described in the scope that follows for each of the above areas. • The federal lead agency will be as described in the scope that follows for each of the above areas Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Draft and final technical memorandum, submitted electronically Task 214.2 — NEPA Compliance To comply with NEPA, this scope of work assumes that an Environmental Assessment will be required and FHWA will be the federal lead agency. The Consultant shall incorporate the analyses conducted during alternative screening pertaining to ecological resources, visual quality, and hazardous waste in support of the preferred alternative described in the DCE. The results of the analyses will be submitted in draft and final reports. Additional detailed analyses regarding endangered species are covered under Task 214.3; cultural resources in Task 214.4; and Section 4(f)/6(f) resources in Task 214.5. These analyses will focus on the impacts that may result from the Preferred Alternative. The work will culminate with the preparation of a NEPA Environmental Assessment. Ecological Resources Analysis The Consultant shall incorporate the ecological resources analysis completed during alternative screening that will include a brief description of existing habitat conditions and will identify species (including species that require special consideration under federal, state, or local regulations) that are known or expected to use habitats in the study area. This information will be supplemented by the results of the shading and coastal geomorphology analyses (Tasks 214.11 and 216, respectively). The effects analyses for all ecosystem resources will describe the potential impacts of the Preferred Alternative and will assess the potential for significant impacts. A discussion of potential mitigation requirements for local, state, and federal permitting will be included. City project staff will conduct one review of the draft report for technical accuracy. Parametrix will make revisions in response to those reviewers' comments before submitting the deliverable to the appropriate reviewing agency Visual Quality Analysis The Consultant shall summarize the results of the visual quality analysis conducted during alternative screening, focusing on the impacts of the Preferred Alternative. The analysis shall incorporate additional visual simulations and graphics developed for the Preferred Alternative. Hazardous Materials Analysis City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 28 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 77 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) The Consultant shall review the hazardous material layer of the WSDOT GIS Workbench and Washington State Department of Ecology Facility Site Atlas/ISIS database, and/or conduct an environmental regulatory database search. The database report will include a map depicting identified sites within 1/2 mile of the project area. Based on a more detailed look at the Preferred Alternative and potential methods of construction, the Consultant will evaluate the potential for the project to encounter hazardous materials. The findings will be documented in a technical memorandum. Environmental Assessment The EA will evaluate two alternatives: the proposed action a no -action alternative. The EA will include the following components: • Cover • NEPA Signature Sheet, including the title of the project and signature spaces for the lead agencies, contact information, and a brief description of the project • Table of Contents • Introduction —The background and history of the project, along with a vicinity map, explanation of the process what was studied and why • Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action • Description of the Proposed Action • Affected Environment, Environmental Effects, Proposed Mitigation —Summaries of pertinent information from the discipline -specific analyses and permitting documents addressing the following disciplines: earth, surface water, wetlands, groundwater, fish, wildlife, and vegetation, hazardous materials, cultural resources, social and community effects (including recreation), and visual impacts. • Discussion of irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources, which will recognize that the proposed action would require a commitment of natural, physical, human, and fiscal resources. • Analysis of secondary and cumulative impacts, based on guidance from the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). • Comments and Coordination — Identification of cooperating and participating agencies, summaries of coordination with other agencies, ESA coordination and concurrence, tribal coordination and comments, Section 106 coordination and concurrence, and newspaper advertisements published • Appendices (as necessary) — Including a list of principal contributors, studies performed, the EA distribution list, glossary and abbreviations, the Section 4(f) evaluation, the Biological Assessment (BA), Alternatives Considered but Rejected, Value Engineering Study (if completed) and a preliminary commitment list The Consultant shall be responsible for compiling the various sections, editing, word processing, graphics, and other production aspects. For budgeting purposes is it assumed that three (3) Consultant staff members shall participate in no more than three 2-hour meetings with the City and the federal lead agency to agree on the outline of the document and to discuss graphics. The Consultant will provide a preliminary review draft EA for review by the City. Four (4) weeks is projected for the review. The City will provide a single set of non -conflicting review comments, which will form the basis of the Consultant's revisions. After these revisions are complete and the City has confirmed that all review comments have been addressed, the EA will be sent to the federal lead agency for a review that is projected to require four (4) weeks. The City will coordinate with the federal lead agency on the review required for the preliminary City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 29 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 78 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) document by Participating Agencies and Tribes. The Consultant shall submit responses to the federal lead agency's review comments to the City and to the federal lead agency. Following the public availability period, the Consultant shall address the comments received on the EA from the public, agencies, and Tribes. The Consultant shall evaluate any necessary modifications to the proposed action or mitigation measures; identify additional impacts or other effects resulting from the changes; prepare appropriate responses to comments received on the EA; and make any required changes to the EA text in the form of an Errata Sheet (no changes shall be made to the EA document). The CONSULTANT shall prepare a List of Final Commitments summarizing the mitigation measures proposed in the EA as modified by the federal lead agency. The Consultant shall prepare a list of final mitigation commitments for review by the City and the federal lead agency. This list shall be similar to the preliminary mitigation measures included in the EA but may include changes after the consideration of public, agency, or tribal comments. These commitments will be reviewed by the City and the federal lead agency to verify acceptance of the commitments. The Consultant shall prepare a draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). After a single round of review and revision by the City and the federal lead agency, the federal lead agency will submit the FONSI for processing to the Federal Register. After the federal lead agency issues the FONSI and the City adopts the EA under SEPA, notices of these actions shall be made available to the public. The Consultant shall compile and respond to approximately 50 substantive comments on the EA. It is assumed that approximately 200 comment submittals (e.g., letters, comment forms, postcards, etc.) will be received, and that most of these will include identical or substantially similar comments. The Consultant shall create a scanned copy of each comment submittal and identify and number individual comments in the margins. The comments and comment responses shall be included as an attachment to the FONSI. The FONSI shall include: Signature/Title Sheet Determination and Findings, including o Description of the Proposed Project o Summary of Agency Coordination and Public Opportunity to Comment o Summary of Comments on the EA (written and oral) and appropriate responses in the form of an Errata Sheet o Determinations and Findings discussion for applicable regulations (e.g. NEPA, Section 106, ESA, Conformity with Air Quality, Environmental Justice, Floodplains, and Wetlands) • Proposed Mitigation Measures • Attachments, including Errata to the Environmental Assessment, Notice of Availability, NOA Newspaper Listing, FONSI Distribution List, Commitment List, and Public and Agency Written Comments and Responses Assumptions The EA will not address noise or air because vehicular use is limited to emergency situations. Stormwater and geotechnical documents developed as part of the design will be relied upon to address earth, surface water, and groundwater topics. • The City will obtain signatures of the appropriate officials at the federal lead agency for the Title Sheet. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 30 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 79 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Necessary contacts and meetings with agencies, tribes, and public officials shall be coordinated through the City, and the City will coordinate a representative from the federal lead agency for presence at these meetings. The Consultant is not authorized to act on behalf of the City or the federal lead agency in any negotiations with other agencies or parties. The Consultant shall not act on their own to commit the City or the federal lead agency to any mitigation or actions with other agencies, or parties without prior approval. • The City and the federal lead agency will be responsible for distributing the EA and notifying the appropriate parties, including placement of any newspaper advertisements. • It is assumed for this scope that the NEPA review will not entail any public meetings. • No hazardous material sites will be identified that require additional investigations. • This NEPA scope assumes meetings as follows: o One 2-hour meeting with resource agencies at the City of Edmonds with two consultant staff participating. o Three 2-hour meetings with the federal lead agency at the City of Edmonds with three consultant staff participating. o Consultant to prepare agenda and summaries of each meeting. Deliverables • Draft, revised draft, and final discipline reports • Draft, revised draft, and final EA • Draft, revised draft, and final FONSI • Draft and final meeting agendas and notes Task 214.3 — Endangered Species Act The Consultant shall prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to support compliance with ESA Section 7. The Biological Assessment will be prepared in accordance with the scope and quality requirements in the WSDOT Advanced Training Manual for Biological Assessment Preparation for Transportation Projects —Version 2017 and using WSDOT's Biological Assessment template. The analysis of potential project effects will be based on the preliminary design. The Consultant shall conduct a site visit and gather and synthesize existing information on pertinent environmental conditions in the project action area, including the distribution and timing of listed or proposed species. No surveys to document the presence or absence of individual species or to delineate specific habitats will be performed for this analysis. To support formal consultation, the BA will need to address cumulative effects, as well as providing greater detail about the life history and status of potentially affected populations of ESA -listed species —Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and southern resident killer whales in particular, along with designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon. The BA will also analyze the results of the coastal geomorphology analysis (Task 216), addressing the potential for substrate changes to affect the availability of species that are important prey for ESA -listed species. Assumptions • The project will require formal consultation based on a potential for the project to adversely effect listed species. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 31 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 80 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • This ESA scope assumes three 2-hour meetings at the City of Edmonds with 3 consultant staff (2 Parametrix and 1 TetraTech) attending. Consultant will prepare meeting agenda and minutes. • All deliverables will be submitted electronically. • Responses to questions from the Services after the BA has been submitted will be addressed under a separate scope of work. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Draft BA. • Revised Draft BA (revised in response to comments from the City) for submittal to the federal lead agency • Final BA (revised in response to comments from the federal lead agency) for submittal to the Services Task 214.4 — National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 The Consultant will support compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act by providing the following services: Define Area of Project Effects (APE) - The Consultant will assist in defining the APE based on the preliminary design of the preferred alternative and prepare a work plan. An aerial map and topographic map of the APE will be included. The Consultant will also assist in drafting formal Section 106 consultation letters on behalf of WSDOT if requested. In keeping with WSDOT's procedures, the City will be responsible for submitting the map to WSDOT and Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). This APE is subject to change depending upon refinement of the project design, and approval of WSDOT and DAHP. Refine Background Research - The Consultant will refine documentation results from background research developed during alternative screening to focus on the preferred alternative. Monitor Geotechnical Explorations —The Consultant will monitor geotechnical explorations in Task 12.4 to identify any subsurface cultural resources and obtain information about subsurface conditions that will guide placement of shovel and auger probes. Locate Utilities - Once the APE has been approved, and prior to archaeological fieldwork, the Consultant will arrange for utility locates to meet the requirements of Washington's new Underground Utilities regulations (RCW 19.122). This requires obtaining a locate survey for any type of excavation on public and private property that will exceed 12 inches in depth. Conduct Archaeological Inventory —The Consultant's archaeologists will conduct a surface and, where feasible, subsurface inventory of the APE. Field methods will be consistent with DAHP guidelines. Surface survey would be conducted along pedestrian transects in the upland and, as tides allow, in the aquatic area. Archaeological or historic resources identified in the surface survey will be photodocumented, described, and left in place. Subsurface testing, where feasible, would be conducted using manually excavated shovel and/or auger probes screened through %-inch mesh. Any subsurface archaeological resources identified will be photodocumented, City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 32 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 81 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) described, and left in place. Any artifacts recovered during screening will be returned to their respective probes following documentation and not collected. Prepare Cultural Resources Technical Report - The Consultant will prepare a Cultural Resources Technical Report summarizing the results of the project. The report will reflect professional standards for format and content as expressed in DAHP guidelines. The Consultant will submit a draft of the report in PDF format to Parametrix for comment. The Consultant will make revisions to the draft report in response to those comments and will submit a revised draft for submittal to the City. Once the City has commented on the report, the Consultant will make any necessary revisions and submit an electronic version of the final report for submittal to WSDOT and DAHP. The report will include: • A description of the project and applicable laws and regulations • A summary of the results of the background literature and records research • The methods used during the fieldwork and the result, • A description of any cultural resources found • An evaluation of architectural resources over 45 years of age • A summary assessment of potential effects to any identified historically significant resources and extent to which the proposed project may affect the resource • Recommendations for completion of any additional cultural resources compliance obligations stemming from the results of our study, • A summary of project procedures that should be followed in the event of an unanticipated discovery of buried cultural materials or human remains during construction The report will include such tables, maps, photographs, and other graphics as are needed to depict the scope of the study and results. Forms for any recorded resources will be included in an appendix to the report. Assumptions • This scope does not include impact mitigation regarding archaeological or historic sites. • This scope assumes that no meetings with clients and/or stakeholders will be required. • This scope assumes that project proponents will arrange Right Of Entry for CRC to conduct field investigations. • This scope assumes that CRC's current levels of insurance coverage are sufficient for this project. • Subsurface testing will not be conducted in BNSF right-of-way. • If human remains are found within the project area, all CRC field investigations will cease immediately, proper authorities will be notified and CRC will not resume field investigations until applicable state laws are addressed. Deliverables • Draft Cultural Resources Technical Report provided as PDF. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 33 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 82 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Final Cultural Resources Technical Report provided as PDF. Task 214.5 -- Section 4(f)/Section 6(f) The Consultant shall prepare a Programmatic Evaluation form as a Transportation Project That Has a Net Benefit to a Section 4(f) Property. As part of that evaluation, an alternatives analysis is required. The Consultant shall summarize the design alternatives considered for connecting Edmonds Street to the waterfront. The Consultant shall prepare a brief Technical Memorandum that describes how the proposed project is consistent with the intended purpose for acquiring the lands under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA). Drafts of both documents will be submitted for concurrent review by the City of Edmonds, WSDOT, and FHWA. Final documents will address comments received. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The project will benefit from federal transportation funding, triggering the need to comply with Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act, due to potential impacts to North Brackett's Landing. • Through context -sensitive design, the project will qualify for a programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation as a Transportation Project That Has a Net Benefit to a Section 4(f) Property. The required alternatives analysis will summarize (1) the results of the previously prepared Access Study, and (2) the design alternatives screening completed for this location. No new alternatives analysis will be prepared. • As noted in the Section 106 task description above, the project will not affect properties containing significant cultural resources, triggering additional review under Section 4(f). • The project will be at least partially located on lands acquired with LWCFA grant funds. • The National Park Service or Washington Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) will determine that the project does not represent a conversion of the recreational use of the Section 6(f) property. Thus no replacement property will be required. • If Brackett's Landing was acquired with any other RCO grants, the project will not represent a conversion of the intended purpose of the acquisition. Draft will be reviewed by City. Revised draft will be reviewed by federal lead agency. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Draft, revised draft, and final Section 4(f) Programmatic Evaluation, submitted electronically. • Draft, revised draft, and final technical memorandum addressing Section 6(f), submitted electronically. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 34 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 83 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 214.6 — SEPA Checklist Using the checklist format available at the City of Edmonds website and the 30% design, the Consultant will summarize baseline information about environmental elements in the project area, along with anticipated project -related impacts. The SEPA checklist will incorporate information derived from the coastal geomorphology analysis (Task 216) and the parking study (Task 15.1), as well as the results of the analysis of shading by temporary and permanent structures over and near aquatic habitats and neighboring vegetation (Task 214.11). Figures developed for other tasks will be used to depict the project vicinity and depict project features. As lead SEPA agency, the City will issue a threshold determination for the project —a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS), a Mitigated DNS, or a Determination of Significance. A Determination of Significance would trigger the need to prepare an environmental impact statement, which would be completed under a separate scope and budget. Assumptions • The City will issue the threshold determination, assumed to be a Mitigated DNS. • The City will be responsible for SEPA notice. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • One Draft SEPA Checklist, submitted electronically. • One Final SEPA Checklist, revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically Task 214.7 — JARPA/HPA Application Using the 30% design as the basis for calculating amounts of fill and other impacts (e.g., shading, vegetation disturbance) within and near waterbodies, the Consultant will complete a JARPA form for the project. The JARPA will also describe work within waters of the State (Puget Sound), to support application for a Hydraulic Project Approval from WDFW. The JARPA will incorporate information derived from the coastal geomorphology analysis (Task 216) and will be submitted with the BA that has been prepared for ESA consultation (Task 214.3). Other supplemental documents to be submitted with the JARPA include a Stormwater Plan indicating water quality and flow control treatments, a table with areas of new, replaced, and existing impervious surface, and a list of neighboring property owners, parcel numbers, and addresses, as required. This task will also include delineation of the OHW line in the project area, as well as any wetlands that may be affected by project construction or operation. The Consultant will prepare a plan set that meets the Corps' requirements for permit application drawings. The 30% design will be the basis of the drawings. The following figures are anticipated: • Vicinity map. • Project plan sheets for temporary and permanent structures (no more than six sheets). • Planting plans for restoring temporarily disturbed areas. • Elevations and sections for temporary and permanent structures (no more than three sheets). City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 35 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 84 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) This scope does not include the development of a mitigation plan to a level of detail suitable for inclusion in a drawing set. Assumptions • The project will be eligible for authorization under the provisions of Nationwide Permit 14 (Linear Transportation Projects). • The Corps' jurisdiction under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act extends to the mean high water (MHW) line. • The Corps' jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act extends to the MHHW line, plus the delineated limits of any adjacent wetlands or streams. • Project construction will not entail any excavation waterward of MHHW. • The temporary work platform for project construction will be supported on piles driven below MHHW and MHW, permanent structures or fill may be placed below MHHW. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of • One Draft DARPA, submitted electronically. • One Final DARPA, revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically. Task 214.8 — Shoreline Permit The Consultant will develop an application for a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and/or variance in accordance with the procedures specified in City of Edmonds Development Information Handout #P72 (Shoreline Permit). Materials to be prepared include a land use application form, statement addressing applicable standards and criteria (code compliance narrative), list of adjacent property owners, and site development plans and photographs, including landscaping and mitigation plans (see Task 21410). Assumptions • Consultant will participate in a hearing in conjunction with the permit process to help answer any questions. However, any effort needed to address comments from Ecology or to support review by the Hearing Examiner (if required) will be conducted under a separate scope of work. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • One draft shoreline permit application package, submitted electronically. One final shoreline permit application package, revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically. • Draft and final code compliance narrative. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 36 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 85 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 214.9 — Critical Areas Report To support the shoreline permit application, the Consultant will complete a critical areas checklist and prepare a critical areas report (including a site plan) in accordance with the requirements specified in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) section 23.40.090. The report will focus on wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. The report will include a conceptual mitigation plan (see Task 214.10). This task includes one meeting with City staff to discuss permit procedures and requirements and to identify potential concerns that might arise during the review process. This task also includes research and field investigations to identify and delineate wetlands and streams within 200 feet of the project site. The Consultant will: • Research available background information on wetlands and streams in the study area, including the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey, National Wetland Inventory (NWI) data, and City of Edmonds wetland inventory data prior to conducting the field work. • Identify, delineate, and generally describe wetlands and buffers in the study area. Wetlands will be delineated according to the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997), the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), and the Regional Supplement to the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (Corps 2010). • Identify wetland boundaries and OHW line of streams in the field and mark with numbered flagging. All delineated wetlands and OHW lines will be documented on a general hand drawn sketch map for use by the Project Survey Team. • Rate wetlands in accordance with the Ecology's 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. • Generally characterize stream and riparian habitat conditions in the field. Classify streams using the City of Edmonds and Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) stream typing systems. • Document soil, vegetation, and hydrology conditions as necessary at representative locations (data plots) throughout the study area to identify wetlands. The data plots will be identified in the field with labeled flagging. Both wetland and upland data plots will be sampled and the data will be included in the critical areas report. Data forms for the regional supplement to the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual will be prepared. • Take photographs of streams, wetlands, and buffers in the study area as necessary to document existing environmental conditions. • Calculate impacts to critical areas and their buffers based on the 30% design footprint, the coastal geomorphology analysis (Task 216), and the results of the analysis of shading by temporary and permanent structures over and near critical areas (Task 21411). Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of • One draft critical areas report, submitted electronically. • One final critical areas report, revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 37 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 86 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 214.10 — Mitigation Design The Consultant will work with staff at the City and at permitting agencies to identify options for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating adverse effects on ecological functions, as well as potential mitigation actions and sites. These conversations will also address topics such as accepted methods for calculating impact areas, as well as appropriate types of mitigation for different kinds of impacts to various ecological functions and processes. This scope anticipates up to four meetings with agency staff to gather information about possible mitigation strategies, and three site visits to evaluate potential mitigation locations. This scope also includes one meeting with staff from Sound Action (a nonprofit organization that works to protect nearshore habitats in Puget Sound) to discuss potential impacts and options for mitigation. Additional meetings with tribes to explore opportunities for mitigating environmental impacts are included in Task 203.6. The Consultant will prepare a technical memorandum that summarizes the results of these conversations. The memorandum will include assessments of the likely feasibility of up to five mitigation options. The memorandum will support decision making about the nature and extent of mitigation to be implemented. The Consultant will identify, screen, and analyze mitigation options to meet the standards of the regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over critical areas that may be affected by the project. Mitigation options may include on -site mitigation, off -site mitigation, and (for wetland impacts) participation in an in -lieu fee or mitigation banking program. The Consultant will prepare a preliminary impact assessment based on the 30% design to identify the anticipated type and amount of mitigation needed to meet regulatory and permitting requirements. Impacts are anticipated within regulated critical areas under the jurisdiction of the Corps, Ecology, WDFW, and the City of Edmonds. Based on these analyses, as well as the City's and the Consultant's conversations with stakeholders and property owners of potential mitigation sites, the Consultant will identify conceptual mitigation. The Consultant will prepare a conceptual plan showing mitigation areas, including mitigation actions, planting areas, and plant lists. This mitigation plan will form the basis for the later 60% design conceptual mitigation plan and subsequent final mitigation plans that will be prepared as part of Final Design. The Consultant will also prepare a plan for restoration of temporarily disturbed areas. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Tech memo documenting decision. • One Draft Conceptual Mitigation Plan, submitted electronically. One Revised Conceptual Mitigation Plan, revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically. Task 214.11 — Shading Calculations and Figure The Consultant shall conduct an insolation model to identify impacts in the form of shading to vegetation for environmental permits. This will be completed utilizing readily available GIS tools. The outcome of this work is to identify the square footage of shadow impacts for various locations. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 38 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 87 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Images with SF vegetation impacts stated. Task 214.12 — Bridge Permit The Consultant shall prepare and submit the bridge permit application to the Coast Guard, and coordinate with the Coast Guard to resolve comments to obtain the bridge permit Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Bridge Permit application • Minutes for conversation with the Coast Guard TASK 215 — FUNDING This amendment provides grant support to the City. Task 215.1 — Grant Support (Tetra Tech) The Consultant will assist the City with identifying additional grant opportunities to fund construction of the project. Support will include preparing grant applications, supporting analyses (such as updated benefit cost analyses), and graphics. TASK 216 — COASTAL GEOMORPHOLOGY ANALYSIS (TETRA TECH) The Consultant shall prepare an analysis of the potential effects of the project on beach sediments. The scope of the analysis includes both permanent and temporary structures proposed in the beach environment. The analysis results are intended to inform environmental reviews (SEPA/NEPA), ESA consultation, and permit applications for the project. Task 216.1 — Basis of Analysis The Consultant will prepare a technical memorandum that documents the physical conditions to be analyzed. Topics to be addressed include the following: • Definition of the geographic scope of the analysis, as well as the limits of the analysis. Data sources to be used (e.g., tidal, wave, wind fetch, prevailing currents, results of geotechnical investigations conducted for the project, typical timing and directionality of storm events). • Footprints of permanent and temporary structures to be analyzed. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 39 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 88 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Existing factors that influence coastal processes in the analysis area (e.g., presence of jetty on -site and ferry terminal nearby, limited sediment supply due to railroad embankment, etc.). The Consultant will submit the Basis of Analysis Technical Memorandum for review and comment. The updated memorandum, addressing review comments, will be incorporated into the Final Geomorphic Analysis Technical Memorandum completed under Task 216.2. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Draft Basis of Analysis Technical Memorandum. Revised Draft Basis of Analysis Technical Memorandum (revised in response to comments from Parametrix) for submittal to the City. All deliverables will be submitted electronically. Task 216.2 — Geomorphic Analysis The Consultant will analyze short-term (temporary) and long-term (permanent) effects of the construction and presence of project structures (e.g., support columns, pilings for temporary work trestle) in the analysis area, addressing the following: • Loss of native substrates due to the presence of structures in the intertidal zone. • Location, extent, and depth of scour near structures. • Location and extent of accretion. • Change in particle size distribution and stratification. • Debris accumulation. • On -site mitigation opportunities (e.g., replenishment) and limitations on the effectiveness of such opportunities. Results of the analysis will be presented in a technical memorandum describing the methods of analysis and key findings. The memorandum will incorporate the revised Basis of Analysis memorandum (Task 216.1) so as to comprise a single, complete report of this task. The Consultant will submit a draft technical memorandum for review and comment, and a final draft memorandum addressing review comments. The Consultant will issue a final technical memorandum addressing review comments on the final draft. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • A single project design configuration (the Preferred Alternative) will be used as the basis for the detailed analysis. Design will show locations and anticipated dimensions of permanent and temporary structures, beach topography, bathymetry, the location of the ordinary high water (OHW) line, and the elevations of mean high water (MHW), mean higher high water (MHHW), and highest astronomical tide (HAT). City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 40 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 89 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • The effects analysis will be based on the results of coastal process modeling, combined with professional judgment. • Temporary structures will remain in place for less than 2 years. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Draft Geomorphic Analysis Technical Memorandum. • Revised Geomorphic Analysis Technical Memorandum, including revised Basis of Analysis (both revised in response to comments from Parametrix) for submittal to the City. • Final Geomorphic Analysis Technical Memorandum, including final Basis of Analysis (revised in response to comments from the City). All deliverables will be submitted electronically. TASK 217 - CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (30% AND 60%) (OTT- SAKAI ) This task provides for Ott -Sakai to provide an estimate and constructability support for 30% and 60%, and provide a construction schedule and conduct a constructability review. Additionally, TKDA will conduct a constructability review with regards to BNSF requirements and coordination under Task 203.5. Task 217.1 — 30% Constructability and Estimate Assumptions Assumptions for this task will consist of: • Create an independent cost estimate at the 30% design submittal, • Produce construction schedule, and • Conduct constructability review. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • 30% cost estimate in Excel and electronic format (.pdf). • Draft Construction schedule in MS Project. • Constructability review memo. Task 217.2 — 60% Constructability and Estimate Assumptions Assumptions for this task will consist of: City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 41 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 90 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Update the cost estimate for 60% • Update the Construction schedule • Update the constructability review memo for 60%. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • 60% cost estimate in Excel and electronic format (.pdf). • Draft Construction schedule, updated, in MS Project. • Constructability review memo updated as required. TASK 218- RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT Provide right of way services for the project including conducting appraisals and acquisitions. Tierra will subcontract and manage the valuations with WSDOT approved and state licensed appraiser, John Nidecker, MAI, Integra Realty Resources (IRR). The project funding estimate, appraisal, appraisal review or Administrative Offer Summary (AOS) will be prepared in compliance with all applicable State and Federal Appraisal Standards, including USPAP and the WSDOT R/W and LAG Manuals utilizing the WSDOT approved format and RES/LPA forms. For an appraisal, a review by another appraiser is required. In the event there is an appraisal, Tierra will subcontract with a WSDOT approved review appraiser to prepare the review appraisal. Tierra agents will perform and oversee three property negotiations for three property owners including Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad ("BNSF"). The offers will be presented in person if possible. An out - of -area owner(s) will be contacted by telephone and by certified mail. • Tierra will: ■ Evaluate the appraisal, administrative offer summary, parcel map, title report and prepare the file electronically and physically. ■ Prepare three offer packages and promptly present offer to purchase all the required real property interests from the property owner. • Offer packages include: offer letters, copy of the approved Administrative Offer Summary (AOS) or the appraisal and review, easement/deed document, exhibits and other related acquisition documents using WSDOT approved forms. • Offer Presentation: Tierra will contact the in state property owners and attempt to meet the owner in person to present to discuss the project. After the offer is presented to the property owner, Tierra will attempt up to two additional "in -person" meetings with a property owner and up to five follow up conversations, which will be via email or phone conversation, to complete negotiations. Negotiation with BNSF, through their out -of -State real estate broker Jones Lang LaSalle, will primarily take place via telephone and email. • Administrative Settlement: If necessary and properly supported and when negotiation amounts exceed the just compensation amount, Tierra will make recommendations for City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 42 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 91 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) administrative settlements. Subject to City approval, Tierra will attempt to secure administrative settlements with property owners to avoid the condemnation process. • Prepare file for closing. • If necessary, prepare file for condemnation by preparing a condemnation summary. • Prepare and maintain diaries. • Prepare and provide status updates monthly or per the request the City. • Upon receipt of signed conveyance documents, Tierra will forward the documents to the City. • Agent QA files for submittal to Project Manager. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Up to two permits or licenses on BNSF property. One roadway easement or deed across BNSF property for the bridge. • Two Temporary Construction Easements (TCE's) on Sunset Avenue. • If the City receives FHWA funding all WSDOT LAG and ROW manual procedures will be followed. The costs for survey and preparation of legal descriptions is not included within consultant's scope of work. • The costs for title reports and title research are not included within consultant's scope of work. • Tierra anticipates working with local BNSF staff as well as it's usual broker in Fort Menk, Texas. All negotiations with the broker in Texas will be via email and phone. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • One appraisal, one review appraisal and two Administrative Offer Summaries. • Obtain or acquire two permits or licenses on BNSF Property, two TCE's from private landowners on Sunset and one permanent easement/deed from BNSF. • Project Funding Estimate TASK 219 — MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL THROUGH 60% This task establishes a Management Reserve for the effort through 60%. Phase 3: 90% TASK 301 — PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Consultant shall manage scope, schedule, budget, and execution of this phase 3. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 43 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 92 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 301.1 — Project Management Plan The Consultant shall update the Project Management Plan (PMP) that defines the framework under which the project will be managed, including risk, change, communications, schedule, scope, and budget control, and quality control procedures . Task 301.2 — Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings The original scope of work included Monthly PMT Meetings. For this amendment, the Consultant shall continue to participate in weekly meetings to 90% as needed for project management updates/design decisions, and prepare a brief meeting summary for each meeting, focused on key decisions and assigned action items. These meetings will be the forum for the City of Edmonds (City) to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. The meetings will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals, and develop potential solutions to design issues. Task 301.3 — Subconsultant Coordination The Consultant shall prepare and execute additional subconsultant agreements and review and submit additional invoices. Task 301.4 — Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination The Consultant shall conduct internal consultant project coordination meetings to execute the project Task 301.5 — Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports The Consultant shall prepare and submit monthly invoice and progress reports. Task 301.6 — Quality Assurance The Consultant shall conduct quality control reviews prior to design submittals. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Duration of this task is from June 1, 2020 through September 2020. • Assumptions Meetings • Assumes 12 weekly PMT meetings by phone, two PMT meetings in person Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Invoices and progress reports. • Updated schedule. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 44 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 93 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • PMT meeting summaries TASK 302 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT (90%) Task 302.1 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up Events The Consultant will research, plan, and staff eight informational booths at local events (i.e., Edmonds Farmer's Market, Art Walk Edmonds, Taste Edmonds, Marina Beach Cleanup, Oktoberfest) or pop-up tabling events (i.e., park, library) as the team works toward 90% design. These events will be aimed at sharing how community feedback helped to update the design and gathering feedback from the broader community and park users on the final design. Following the events, the Consultant will prepare a high-level summary. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Existing project materials (i.e., fact sheet, frequently asked questions [FAQ]) will be used to support informational booths. • Consultant will coordinate logistics, be responsible for table/booth set-up, and provide one staff from PMX and one from Envirolssues for each event. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final tabling plan. • Staffing and set-up of eight information tables and/or pop-up events for up to eight hours per event. • One draft and one final tabling effort summary. Task 302.2 Public Open House Meetings (1) / Online Open Houses (1) The Consultant will schedule, coordinate, staff, and provide materials for one public open house meeting at or before the 90% design milestone, depending upon the needs of the design team, to share information with and gather feedback from the community. For each meeting, the Consultant will coordinate logistics, develop a meeting plan, staff, facilitate, and summarize the meeting. In conjunction with the in -person open house meetings, the Consultant will develop an online open house to share the same content that will be displayed at each public meeting and to solicit community feedback online. The online open house will include use of a custom sub -domain website that will be seamlessly linked from the City's website, project -specific customized layout, station tabs to match in -person meeting station materials, fully responsive design (i.e., for smart phones, tablets), and integration with Google Translate and social share. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 45 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 94 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Consultant will provide up to two staff from Envirolssues, one from Tetra Tech, and one from PMX for each meeting, including facilitation and presentation support. Architect attendance under Task 304. • Content developed for public meetings will be used to populate the online open house. Materials and messaging development under Task 302.4. • City will pay for room rentals. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Coordination for and staff support and/or facilitation at one public meeting. • One draft and one final meeting plan. • One draft and one final meeting agenda. • One draft and one final set of supporting meeting documents (i.e., comment forms, sign -in sheets, directional signage, name tags). • One online open house. • One draft and one final meeting summary (includes both in -person and online). Task 302.3 Property Owner Briefings The Consultant will schedule and conduct two briefings with property owners in the project area at or before the 90% design milestone, depending upon the needs of the design team. Briefings will be designed to share updates to the project design and schedule, and to solicit input and feedback on project design elements and on anticipated construction impacts. The Consultant will schedule the meetings and document input received during the briefings. Meetings will be conducted with small groups, including property owners on Sunset Avenue N, and on Edmonds Street between Sunset Avenue N and 3rd Avenue N. Property owners will be notified of the meetings via direct mail to the street addresses. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Existing project materials or materials developed by the technical team will be used at the briefings. • Consultant will provide one Envirolssues and one PMX support staff for each briefing. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 46 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 95 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Scheduling and attendance at two briefings. • One draft and one final briefing plan. • One draft and one final materials packet (graphics/materials to be supplied by the City and technical team) • One draft and one final briefing key takeaway summary with attendance, date of meeting, and key points discussed. Task 302.4 Materials The Consultant will develop content and graphic design for project materials, email updates, and website content. Project materials may include the development of one folio/fact sheet, updates to the project FAQ, one traveling display, meeting notifications, Sunset neighborhood letters, media releases, utility bill inserts, and up to 12 display boards for the public meeting. Meeting notifications will likely include one poster, one flier, email updates, social media posts, and display ads. A letter will be sent to the Sunset Avenue project neighbors to notify them of the property owner briefings. The Consultant will also prepare three monthly email updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will coordinate printing of materials (e.g., display ads, display boards, etc.). • Consultant will distribute posters, fliers to local businesses, and traveling display to City -approved locations. • Consultant will coordinate and send monthly email updates to project listserv. • Consultant will coordinate mailing of Sunset neighborhood letter. • Consultant will coordinate language translations for materials in Spanish, Korean, and simplified Chinese. • City will post notifications to social media and City -managed project website. • City will be responsible for media relations. • City will pay for costs associated with display ads. • City will share project messages and produced materials with key project partners, such as the Port of Edmonds, for inclusion in their communication materials. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final fact sheet/folio. • One draft and one final FAQ sheet updates. • One draft and one final utility bill inserts. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 47 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 96 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • One draft and one final traveling display board. • 12 draft and 12 final meeting display boards. • One draft and one final meeting poster. • One draft and one final meeting flier. • One draft and one final print display ad. • One draft and one final online display ad. • One draft and one final Sunset neighborhood letter. • Monthly content updates for project website. • Three draft and three final email updates. Task 302.5 Communication Tracking and Comment Management Consultant will monitor the project email inbox, forward comments to the project team, provide draft responses when needed, and track incoming and outgoing project correspondence. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will send responses back to community members. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Communication responses, as needed. • Email files of saved project correspondence or PDF of all email correspondence. TASK 303 — STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION Task 303.1 — Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan Update the Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Communication with Stakeholders is required for design to progress to 90% and to complete the environmental evaluation and submit environmental permit applications. Public Art Design Commission meetings are accounted for under task 305 for Phase 3. Task 303.2 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coordination (90%) The Consultant shall prepare for and participate in phone -call coordination and up to eight additional meetings with the resource agencies to provide status updates and follow up as needed on mitigation requirements and design as well as permitting status. The Consultant shall develop information for the meetings and provide follow-up information as requested. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 48 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 97 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 303.3 BNSF Meetings (90%) This task assumes two plan review meetings and additional phone coordination with BNSF between the 60% and the 90% design submittal discuss project design needs, and follow up as needed on construction easements, permanent easements, and agreements. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Two additional coordination meetings with BNSF and additional phone call coordination Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: Agendas and meeting minutes. Task 303.4 BNSF Final Submittal (90%) The Consultant shall develop a Final Submittal package at this 90% stage for BNSF review and comment. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The Consultant 90% Design plans (Final Design submittal) submitted to BNSF shall meet the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation projects, May 2016. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Response to railroad review comments on the 30% submittal. The Final Plans submittal shall reflect all previous review comments.30% Design Comments. • Design Plans showing a Plan View, Elevation View, Typical Section, Construction Notes, and railroad profile grade diagram. Plans to indicate structure design criteria and construction methods (developed under Task 306.2). • Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements (developed under Task 306.2). 0 Drainage Report and design plans conforming to BNSF grade separation and construction guidelines 0 Construction Phasing Plans showing all required phasing, construction procedures, temporary shoring layout, controlling dimensions and elevations (developed under Task 306.2). City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 49 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 98 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Conduct sight distance analysis to see if our bridge obstructs sight lines to the proposed signal after BNSF adds a second track. BNSF will complete the design and construction a supplemental signal if needed. The Consultant will update the approximate for cost for negotiation to BNSF for that design and construction. • Includes review by TKDA. Task 303.5 Tribes Meetings (90%) This scope adds up to 6 meetings with tribal staff to provide updates on the status of the project during the 60% to 90% Design phase and to solicit input on mitigation plans. Tribe members will also be invited to environmental resource agency meetings. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes. Task 303.6 Agency Stakeholder Meetings (90%) This task includes the Consultant's preparation and participation in stakeholder agency meetings. This amendment provides for additional meetings in Edmonds. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • WSDOT and WSF (two meetings at WSF) (two staff members from Parametrix). • One Advisory Committee meeting to support project design (one staff member from Parametrix) • Edmonds Parks & Recreation, assume all meetings will be in weekly meetings or as part of design review under other tasks • VIA Architecture's (VIA's) attendance is provided for in Task 304. Deliverables: Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector SO October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 99 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 303.7 City Council Briefings (90%) The Consultant shall prepare and conduct presentations, in support of City Staff, briefing the City Council on the project status and key design topics. This task provides for one additional meeting with City Council for design and cost estimate updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • One with City Council. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Presentation materials. Task 303.8 — Technical Committee Meetings (90%) This Scope includes preparing for and participating in one technical design committee meeting that will include City Public Works, Parks & Recreation, utilities, and planning to provide input to the design. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Agendas and meeting minutes TASK 304.0 — ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) (90%) Task 304.1 — 90% Design This task provides for: • Design team meetings and coordination through 90%: o Up to four in person design team coordination meetings with engineering and other consultants o Up to three additional phone coordination meetings. • Support for presentations and meetings to the City, agencies, and tribes through 90%: o Attendance at up to one meeting in person. o Support at up to two additional meetings by phone. • Support for one public meeting: o Updates to visual graphics developed through 60% Design. o Board layout and PowerPoint for public meeting. o Two staff present at public meeting to provide verbal presentation and answer questions City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 51 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 100 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Up to two meetings by phone to coordinate presentation. o 3D computer animation model for coordination with engineering and visual fly -through • 90% Design Drawings: o Close collaboration between Parametrix and VIA on the resolution of the structural form of the bridge and bridge elements and integration of art with the artist. o Draft specifications of architectural materials and finishes o Update to drawings denoting architectural design for: ■ Lighting design. ■ Throw barrier, crash rail, hand rail sections, and details. ■ Seating areas and benches. ■ Refined plan including plaza and raised intersection plans. ■ Refined bridge elevations. ■ Restroom plans, elevations, interior elevations, details, roof plan, and lighting plan. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • No physical models will be produced. • Cost estimate not completed by the architect, but support is provided. This includes review of all items related to the architecture and urban design elements as well as coordination of quantities, etc. • Structural type, depth, configuration, and architectural expression based on design intent are set at the beginning of this task. Any changes that impact the design intentions established in previous phases will require additional design scope. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • 90% Design Drawings as outlined above. • Preliminary specifications. TASK 305.0 - ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION (90%) For this task, this work expands to include: • Up to four in person meetings specifically for art integration. • Up to three additional design team meetings by phone • Up to two meetings with the Public Art Design Commission • One Open House 90% • Detailed integration with the bridge elements such as handrail, deck surface, land bridge, etc. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 52 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 101 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Detailed integration with the restroom and plaza design. • Incorporation in seating areas, etc. • Integration in place making at Sunset Avenue. • Incorporation in to moments of discovery where the structure meets the beach walk. • Coordination with functional systems including stormwater, wayfinding, and cultural and historical placemaking. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Close collaboration between artist, architectural team and City Parks personnel will be very important for the enhancement of an integrated concept delivery to 90% design. • All meetings for art coordination are in addition to meetings outlined in Architectural Collaboration Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Integration of the art plan and any needed details or attachments into 90% drawings. • Additional graphics for Arts Commission or other city groups and agencies up to (3) views, with updates as needed for 90% Any meeting support assumed to be included in the meetings listed above. TASK 306 — 90% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Engineering design activities defined in this section is to advance the 60% level design to 90% design Task 306.1 — Basis of Design Through the design from 60-90% design, the Basis of Design document will be continuously updated to reflect he latest designs. Task 306.2 — 90% Engineering for the Preferred Alternative The Consultant shall develop the 60% plans to a 90% level, 90% designs are identified below: Updating Design Criteria • Updating the design criteria from 60% — draft for City to review and approval. • Provide response to City's review comments. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 53 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 102 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Engineering Design and Plan Development Civil engineering and traffic management designs includes: • Horizontal Alignment and Vertical Profile of the crossing and approach structures • Summary of Quantities • Alignment, Right -of -Way and Survey Control Plans. • Site Preparation Plans • TESC Plans and Details (PMX w Tt support) • Intersection layouts and paving details • Signing and pavement marking plans Sunset Avenue intersection improvements. • Grading section and contours plans • Pavement markings and signing plan • Project footprint and earthwork quantities • Typical roadway sections • Bollard requirements and layouts • Mixing zone/parking lot layouts and details (Via and PMX) • Beach mitigations. • Maintenance of traffic (including railroads). • Traffic control plans during construction • Stormwater designs for conveyance and water quality treatment. • Drainage Report conforming to City stormwater standards, including the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. Provide submittal for BNSF 90% submittal meeting BNSF grade separation guidelines (Tt) • Drainage plan (Tt) • Utility relocation, replacement, and protection. (Tt) • Illumination plan (Tt) • New restroom layout and utility connections. • Roadway profile plans • Paving plans • Drainage plans • Fencing plans • Railroad profile grade diagram — vertical and horizontal clearances • Landscaping plans • Provide response to 60% review comments City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 54 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 103 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Structural designs include: • Structural analysis to determine the span layout and superstructure sizes and shapes. • Structural analysis to determine the shapes and sizes of piers and abutments. • Structural analysis for the foundation types and the sizes/depths. • Seismic design dynamic model analysis. • Constructability assessment, including consideration for Artesian Water pressure effects. • Develop Construction Notes. • Assessment of construction restrictions due to BNSF operation restrictions. • Art elements including a meeting with the City. • Update span layouts. • Design of bridge deck and overlay material, thickness. • Design of girder type and typical sections • Design of column size and shape. • Design of foundation size and type. • Design of structural details of sidewalk, barrier, railing, etc. • Design of bridge illumination (architect support) and attachments • Design of bridge abutment and wingwalls • Design of retaining walls and structural walls • Sunset Avenue slope stabilization (Geotech support) • Construction access and staging • Construction Phasing studies include anticipated phasing, construction procedures, temporary structure layout, controlling dimensions, and elevations. • Ground improvement (if required)(Geotech Support). • Identify Technology for bollard operation. (including review of bullyboy.co.nz) • Provide response to 60% review comments Restroom • New restroom layout (VIA under task 205) and utility connections.(Tt) • Structural Design (PMX) • Mechanical, electrical (Tt) • Provide response to 60% review comments City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector SS October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 104 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Technical Specifications (Special Provisions) • Updating the following technical specification input to 90% level • Technical input to Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements. (railroad specific) • Incorporate mutually agreed 60% review comments. • Provide response to review comments • Update sketches and figures to be included as part of permitting package. Architectural and artistic effort provided for under tasks 205 and 207 Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The design shall meet the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation projects, May 2016, unless otherwise agreed in writing between BNSF and the City. • The City shall provide review comments in a single consolidated file. • Artesian water pressure may change the foundation design. Outreach to contractors specializing in constructability with artesian water pressure may require foundation design requirements, resulting in additional scope and budget. Meetings • Basis of Design review meeting: o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) from PMX, One (1) from Tetra Tech o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Design review meetings (90%): o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: 3 hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) from PMX, One (1) from Tetra Tech o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • Utility Coordination meetings (90%): o Number of meetings: 1 meeting for follow up from 60% design o Length of each meeting: 2 hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: One (1) from PMX, One (1) from Tetra Tech o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 56 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 105 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Design Criteria - draft. • 90% Design Plans (in electronic .pdf). • 90% technical input to specifications/special provisions. • Meeting notes with BNSF and other stakeholders. • 90% cost estimate (prepared under Task 310). • Construction schedule. (prepared under Task 310). • Written responses to City's consolidated review comments Task 306.3 — City Permits The Consultant shall develop applications for City permits. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • One review cycle with the City is assumed • Formal Pre -Application Meeting with the City Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Draft and Final Building Permit application • Draft and Final Grading, Fill & Excavation Permit application • Draft and Final Demolition Permit application • Draft and Final Plumbing Permit application • Draft and Final Parking Lot Permit application • Draft and Final Retaining Walls Permit application • Draft and Final Sign Permit application • Draft and Right of Way Use Permit application City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 57 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 106 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) TASK 307 90% DESIGN GEOTECHNICAL SUPPORT Task 307.1 90% Design Geotechnical Support Under 90% design, the geotechnical Consultant shall: • Participate in conference calls as needed to address geotechnical aspects of the project • Finalize the geotechnical report to match final design elements • Quality check of plans and specifications to confirm geotechnical comments were incorporated. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: No significant changes have been made to the design advanced for 60% that affect geotechnical recommendations. • No additional field explorations will be performed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Final Geotechnical Report, submitted electronically. • Review comments on plans and specifications. TASK 308 — ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION (90%) This task provides for: • Participation in up to six 1-hour teleconference meetings as needed to address environmental permitting issues • Minor modifications to permit applications, to accommodate changes in the project design • Up to 12 hours of support to the project design team, to address questions and issues related to environmental documentation and permits • Preparation of a mitigation plan The scope and duration of environmental project elements are subject to changing resource agency policy, staff interpretation, and public comment. The scope of an environmental permitting effort therefore cannot be predicted with certainty. Budget estimates for responding to public and agency comments on permit applications and mitigation plans are estimates that are considered a reasonable level of effort based on prior experience. It is assumed that response to resource agency/public comments and permit coordination will be performed on a time and materials basis up to the budgeted amounts. Actual time required to respond to comments and coordinate the permit process may exceed or be less than budget, depending on specific tasks and issues encountered. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 58 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 107 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Effort and costs for agency/public response to comments and permit coordination activities will be reported monthly relative to budget. It is assumed that agency response or coordination efforts requiring significant effort will be reviewed and authorized by PMX and the City before implementing the applicable agency response effort Assumptions • Project design changes will not be so substantial as to reinitiate of ESA consultation or resubmit of permit applications • Documentation of consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Act will be completed by the federal lead agency for NEPA compliance • No additional field studies will be performed for this task Task 308.1 — Mitigation Plans The Consultant will prepare formal plans for mitigating impacts to environmental resources. The mitigation plans will be based on the Conceptual Mitigation Plan developed under Task 214.10 and will comply with applicable requirements in federal, state, and local regulations. The analyses of impacts and mitigation needs will be based on the 60% design. This task includes the preparation of individual mitigation plans meeting the regulatory standards or permit requirements for each agency with jurisdiction over affected critical areas. Mitigation is expected to be needed for unavoidable impacts to critical areas under the jurisdiction of the Corps, Ecology, WDFW, and the City of Edmonds. Each plan is expected to comprise approximately 5 to 10 pages of text, plus 2 figures, and will address the following topics: • Mitigation goals • Success criteria • Existing conditions at mitigation sites • Proposed restoration activities • Monitoring plan • Contingency plan • Reporting Mitigation plan implementation, including local critical areas documentation for mitigation site construction and preparation of construction drawings for mitigation and restoration elements, will be completed under a separate scope of work. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Mitigation for project -related impacts to natural resources will be accomplished through City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 59 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 108 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Mitigation for impacts to wetlands or wetland buffers will take place through participation in an in -lieu fee or mitigation banking program and will not entail wetland creation or other actions necessitating the preparation of specific sheets in the plan set Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Four Draft Mitigation Plans (one each for the Corps, Ecology, WDFW, and the City of Edmonds), submitted electronically for review by City staff • Four Revised Mitigation Plans one each for the Corps, Ecology, WDFW, and the City of Edmonds), revised in response to comments from City staff, submitted electronically • Responses to comments from reviewing agencies TASK 309 - FUNDING SUPPORT EFFORT FOR 90% Task 309.1 — Grant Support The Consultant will assist the City with identifying additional grant opportunities to fund construction of the project. Support will include preparing grant applications, supporting analyses (such as updated benefit cost analyses), and graphics. TASK 310 - CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (90%) (OTT-SAKAI) This task provides for Ott -Sakai to provide an updated estimate, construction schedule and constructability report for 90%. Task 310.1 — 90% Constructability and Estimate Assumptions Assumptions for this task will consist of: • Update the cost estimate for 90% • Update the Construction schedule • Update the constructability review memo for 90%. Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • 90% cost estimate in Excel and electronic format (.pdf). • Construction schedule, updated, in MS Project. • Constructability review memo updated as required. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 60 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 109 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) TASK 311 — MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL 90% This task establishes a Management Reserve for the effort through 90%. Phase 4: From 90% to Final TASK 401 — PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Consultant shall manage scope, schedule, budget, and execution of this amendment. Task 401.1 — Project Management Plan The Consultant shall update the Project Management Plan (PMP) that defines the framework under which the project will be managed, including risk, change, communications, schedule, scope, and budget control for Phase 4 work. Task 401.2 — Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings The original scope of work included Monthly PMT Meetings. For this amendment, the Consultant shall continue to participate in weekly meetings as needed for project management updates/design decisions, and prepare a brief meeting summary for each meeting, focused on key decisions and assigned action items. These meetings will be the forum for the City of Edmonds (City) to provide input and guidance for the direction of the project. The meetings will also be used to discuss project issues, approve submittals, and develop potential solutions to design issues. Twelve meetings are assumed, two meetings will be in -person, the remainder on conference call. Task 401.3 — Subconsultant Coordination The Consultant shall prepare and execute additional subconsultant agreements and review and submit additional invoices. Task 401.4 — Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination The Consultant shall conduct additional internal consultant project coordination meetings to execute the project. Task 401.5 — Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports The Consultant shall prepare and submit monthly invoice and progress reports. Task 401.6 — Quality Assurance The Consultant shall conduct additional quality control reviews on additional design materials. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Duration of this task is five months, through October 2020 through February 2021. Meetings City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 61 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 110 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Meetings for this task include: Twelve (12) PMT Meetings, two in person, remainder on conference call Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Invoices and progress reports. • Updated schedule. Task 402 — Community Events and Engagement (from 90% to Final) Task 402.1 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up Events The Consultant will research, plan, and staff two informational booths at local events (i.e., Edmonds Farmer's Market, Art Walk Edmonds, Taste Edmonds, Marina Beach Cleanup, Oktoberfest) and pop-up tabling events (i.e., park, library) in the spring/summer to share the final design. These events will be aimed at sharing the final design, thanking the community for their input, and talking about what the community can expect prior to construction. Following the events, the Consultant will prepare a high-level summary. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include • Existing project materials (i.e., fact sheet, frequently asked questions [FAQ]) will be used to support informational booths. • Consultant will coordinate logistics, be responsible for table/booth set-up, and provide one staff from PMX and one from Envirolssues for each event. A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final spring/summer tabling plan. • Staffing and set-up of two information tables and/or pop-up events for up to eight hours per event. • One draft and one final spring/summer tabling effort summary. Task 402.2 Property Owner Briefings The Consultant will schedule and conduct two briefings with property owners in the project area at or before the final design milestone. Briefings will be designed to share the final design and begin to discuss anticipated construction impacts. The Consultant will schedule the meetings and document input received during the briefings. Meetings will be conducted with small groups, including property owners on Sunset Avenue N, and on City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 62 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 111 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Edmonds Street between Sunset Avenue N and 3rd Avenue N. Property owners will be notified of the meetings via direct mail to the street addresses. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Existing project materials or materials developed by the technical team will be used at the briefings. • Consultant will provide one Envirolssues and one PMX support staff for each briefing. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Scheduling and attendance at two briefings. • One draft and one final briefing plan. • One draft and one final materials packet (graphics/materials to be supplied by the City and technical team) • One draft and one final briefing key takeaway summary with attendance, date of meeting, and key points discussed. Task 402.3 Materials The Consultant will develop content and graphic design for project materials, email updates, and website and website content. Project materials may include the development of one folio/fact sheet, updates to the project FAQ, one traveling display, meeting notifications, Sunset neighborhood letters, media releases, utility bill inserts. A letter will be sent to the Sunset Avenue project neighbors to notify them of the property owner briefings. The Consultant will also prepare five monthly email updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include • Consultant will coordinate printing of materials (e.g., display ads, display boards, etc.). • Consultant will distribute posters, fliers to local businesses, and traveling display to City -approved locations. • Consultant will coordinate and send monthly email updates to project listserv. • Consultant will coordinate mailing of Sunset neighborhood letter. • Consultant will coordinate language translations for materials in Spanish, Korean, and simplified Chinese. • Consultant will coordinate with the City on the migration of website content currently on Consultant's server to the City, and further assist the City in the development of new website materials when appropriate. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 63 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 112 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • City will post notifications to social media and City -managed project website. • City will be responsible for media relations. • City will pay for costs associated with display ads. • City will share project messages and produced materials with key project partners, such as the Port of Edmonds, for inclusion in their communication materials. • A level of effort for this task has been assumed based on the quantities below. Should the needs rise above this level of effort, it will be documented in the progress report and changes to the scope may need to be discussed. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • One draft and one final fact sheet/folio. • One draft and one final FAQ sheet updates. • One draft and one final utility bill inserts. • One draft and one final traveling display board. • One draft and one final print display ad. • One draft and one final online display ad. • One draft and one final Sunset neighborhood letter. • Monthly content updates for project website. • Three draft and three final email updates. Task 402.4 Communication Tracking and Comment Management Consultant will monitor the project email inbox, forward comments to the project team, provide draft responses when needed, and track incoming and outgoing project correspondence. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Consultant will send responses back to community members. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Communication responses, as needed. • Email files of saved project correspondence or PDF of all email correspondence. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 64 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 113 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) TASK 403 - STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION Task 403.1 — Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan Update the Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan as needed to deliver 100% and Final Plans. Public Art Design Commission meetings are accounted for under task 405 for Phase 4. Task 403.2 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coordination The Consultant shall prepare for and participate in phone -call coordination and one additional meeting with the resource agencies to provide status updates and follow up as needed on mitigation requirements and design as well as permitting status. The Consultant shall develop information for the meetings and provide follow-up information as requested Task 403.3 BNSF Meetings This task assumes two plan review meetings with BNSF to discuss the Final submittal and follow up on outstanding issues. Meetings • BNSF Meetings for 90%: o Number of meetings: Two (2) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: BNSF Seattle o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, 1 TKDA o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Agendas and meeting minutes. Task 403.4 Tribes Meetings This scope includes up to 6 meetings with tribal staff to provide updates on the status of the project during the 90% to Final Design phase and to solicit input on mitigation plans. Tribe members will also be invited to environmental resource agency meetings. Meetings • Tribal Meetings for 90%: o Number of meetings: Six (6) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: Tribal Locales City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 65 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 114 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX (VIA and Myers Sculpture meetings includes in tasks 405 and 406) o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes. Task 403.5 Agency Stakeholder Meetings The Consultant shall prepare for and participate in stakeholder agency meetings. Meetings • Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and Washington State Ferries meeting o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: WSF o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes • South County Fire and Rescue o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: One (1) hour o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 2 PMX, o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables: Deliverables for this task include: • Meeting agendas and minutes. Task 403.6 City Council Briefings The Consultant shall prepare and conduct presentations, in support of City Staff, briefing the City Council on the project status and key design topics This task provides for one additional meeting with City Council for design and cost estimate updates. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • one meetings with City Council for Final Design City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 66 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 115 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Presentation materials. Task 403.7 — Technical Committee Meetings This Scope includes preparing for and participating in one technical design committee meeting that include City Public Works, Parks & Recreation, utilities, and planning to provide input to the design. Assumes one meeting at the 30% level and one at the 60% level to take place in Edmonds. Meetings Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Technical Committee Meeting o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meeting: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: 3 PMX. VIA attendance provided for in task 404 o Prepare meeting agenda and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Agendas and meeting minutes TASK 404.0 —ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) 100% AND FINAL This Amendment provides for: • Design team meetings and coordination through Final Design: o Up to two in person design team coordination meetings with engineering and other consultants. o Up to two additional phone coordination meetings. • Support for presentations and meetings to the City, agencies, and tribes through Final Design: o Attendance at up to one meeting in person. o Support at up to one additional meeting by phone. • Final Design Drawings: o Close collaboration between Parametrix and VIA on the resolution of the structural form of the bridge and bridge elements and integration of art with the artist. o Final specifications of architectural materials and finishes o Final coordination of drawings denoting architectural design for: City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 67 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 116 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) ■ Lighting design. ■ Throw barrier, crash rail, hand rail sections, and details. ■ Seating areas and benches. ■ Refined plan including plaza and raised intersection plans. ■ Refined bridge elevations. ■ Restroom plans, elevations, interior elevations, details, roof plan, and lighting plan • Graphics for the Final Design: o Five views rendered with context which are an aerial view, a view from Sunset looking north, a view from the waterfront path looking north, a view from the end of Brackett's Landing jetty, and a view from the water. o Rendered plan graphic for presentations, etc. o Fly through animation Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Two rounds of revisions possible after 100% submission. • No physical models will be produced. • Structural type, depth, configuration, and architectural expression based on design intent are set at the beginning of this task. Any changes that impact the design intentions established in previous phases will require additional design scope. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • 100% Design Drawings and specifications as outlined above. • Revisions as required for completed Final Design Drawings. • Revisions as required for completed specifications. • Graphic representation of design including five views and flythrough animation as described above. Cost estimate not completed by the architect, but support is provided. This includes review of all items related to the architecture and urban design elements as well as coordination of quantities, etc. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 68 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 117 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) TASK 405.0 - ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION Integration of art and related creative processes into the overall design of the bridge architecture, approaches, site integration, cultural and interpretive way finding, and participation in the relevant public and stakeholder outreach development and programs.. This work includes: • Up to two in person design team meetings for art integration. • Up to two additional phone coordination meetings • 1 meeting with Public Art Design Commission • Detailed integration with the bridge elements such as handrail, deck surface, land bridge, etc. • Detailed integration with the restroom and plaza design. • Incorporation in seating areas, etc. • Integration in place making at Sunset Avenue. • Incorporation in to moments of discovery where the structure meets the beach walk. • Coordination with functional systems including stormwater, wayfinding, and cultural and historical placemaking. Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • Close collaboration between artist, architectural team and City Parks personnel will be very important for the enhancement of an integrated concept delivery to Final% design. • All meetings for art coordination will be included in the count for team meetings outlined in Task 6.0. Deliverables Deliverables for this task include: • Integration of the art plan and any needed details or attachments into 100% and Final drawings. TASK 406 - FINAL ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Engineering design activities defined in this section is to advance the 90% level design to Final design Task 406.1 — Basis of Design The Basis of Design document will be finalized. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 69 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 118 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Task 406.2 — Final Engineering for the Preferred Alternative The Consultant shall finalize the design: Finalize the Design Criteria • Finalize the design criteria — 100 % for City to review (minor comments only) and approval. • Provide response to City's review comments. Engineering Design and Plan to 100% Civil engineering and traffic management designs includes: • Summary of Quantities • TESC Plans and Details • Intersection layouts • Sunset Avenue intersection improvements: • Grading section and contour plans • Project footprint and earthwork quantities • Mixing zone/parking lot layouts and details (Via and PMX). • Beach mitigations. • Maintenance of traffic (including railroads). • Traffic control plans during construction • Stormwater designs for conveyance and water quality treatment (Tt) • Drainage Report conforming to City Stormwater standards, including the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. (Tt) • Utility relocation, replacement, and protection. (Tt) • New restroom layout and utility connections. • Paving plans • Drainage plans • Landscaping plans • Provide response to 100% review comments (minor) Structural designs include: City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 70 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 119 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) • Finalize Construction Notes. • Finalize assessment of construction restrictions due to BNSF operation restrictions. • Finalize structural design plans for the elevated structures including necessary details. • Finalize retaining wall and retained structural design and necessary details. • Finalize other misc. structural design and necessary details. • Finalize feasible construction access and staging layouts • Finalize feasible construction phasing plans. • Finalize ground improvement plans. • Provide response to 100% review comments (minor) Technical Specifications (Special Provisions) • Finalize the following technical specification input • Technical Input to Project Specifications and / or Special Provisions, including railroad coordination requirements. (railroad specific) • Incorporate mutually agreed 90% review comments. • Provide response to 100% review comments (minor) Assumptions Assumptions for this task include: • The City shall provide review comments in a single consolidated file. • City's review comments are minor, editorial only Meetings • Basis of Design review meeting (100%): o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) from Parametrix, One (1) from Tetra Tech o Prepare agendas and minutes • Design review meetings (100%): City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 71 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 120 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: Two (2) from Parametrix, One (1) from Tetra Tech Via attendance in task xx Prepare agendas and minutes • Utility Coordination meetings (100%): o Number of meetings: One (1) o Length of each meeting: Two (2) hours o Location of the meetings: City of Edmonds o Number of consultant staff for each meeting: One (1) from Parametrix, One (1) from Tetra Tech Prepare agendas and minutes Deliverables Deliverables for 100% include: • Design Criteria — 100%. • 100% Design Plans (in electronic .pdf). • 100% technical input to specifications/special provisions. • Meeting notes with BNSF and other stakeholders. • 100% cost estimate (prepared under Task 407). • 100% construction schedule. (prepared under Task 407). • Written responses to City's consolidated review comments Deliverables for Final camera ready include: • Design Criteria. • Design Plans (signed hard copy and in electronic .pdf). • Technical input to specifications/special provisions. • Cost estimate (prepared under Task 407). • Feasible construction schedule. (prepared under Task 407). ask 406.3 — Mitigation Design (to 100% and Final) The Consultant shall update the mitigation plan developed under Phase 3 as needed to reflect minor changes in project -related impacts resulting from adjustments to the project design. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 72 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 121 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Assumptions • The mitigation plan will be substantially complete and accepted by the applicable agencies during Phase 3 • Project design changes will not be so substantial as to re -initiation of ESA consultation or resubmittal of permit applications • No additional field studies will be performed for this task Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • One Revised Mitigation Plan, reflecting minor changes in project -related impacts resulting from adjustments to the project design, submitted electronically. TASK 407 — CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (OTT SAKAI) This task provides for Ott -Sakai to provide an estimate and constructability review and update as needed for 100% and Final and provide an updated construction schedule and cost estimate. TASK 408 — FUNDING This amendment provides for additional grant support to the City between the 90% and final design. Task 408.1 — Grant Support The Consultant will assist the City with identifying additional grant opportunities to fund construction of the project. Support will include preparing grant applications, supporting analyses (such as updated benefit cost analyses), and graphics. TASK 409 — BID SUPPORT This task provides for consultant support during the advertising and bidding phase of work. Task 409.1 — Develop Addendums This task provides for the development of addendums required during the bid cycle Assumptions • Up to five addendums of up to 10 plan sheet revisions and 20 spec sheets each • Minor design clarifications are assumed and no redesign City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 73 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 122 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • One pdf of draft and one pdf of final addendums (5) Task 409.2 — Answer RFI's This task provides for answering Requests for Information (RFI) from contractors bidding on the project during advertisement. Assumptions • Up to 10 RFIs Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Responses to RFIs Task 409.3 - Participate in Pre -Bid Meeting This task provides for the preparation and attendance for pre -bid meeting. Assumptions • Attendance of one pre bid meeting Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Meeting agenda (draft, final) • Meeting presentation (draft, final) • Meeting Minutes (draft, final) Task 409.4 — Review Bids This task provides for the review of bids from contractors for validity. City of Edmonds SS4-2S77-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 74 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 123 1.10.a SCOPE OF WORK (continued) Assumptions • Review up to 5 bids Deliverables Deliverables for this task will consist of: • Email of findings and recommendation TASK 410 -MANAGEMENT RESERVE (100% AND FINAL) This task establishes a Management Reserve for the effort through Final design. City of Edmonds 554-2577-823 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 75 October 2018 Scope of Work Packet Pg. 124 Edmond St Waterfront Connector 1.10.b Amendment 04 PMX BRUCE MEYERS Envirolssues Ott Sakai Shannon Wilson Tetra Tech Tierra Row TKDA Via Total PHASE HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST Hours Cost 201 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 598 $123,280.52 0 $0.00 141 $14,538.22 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 115 $21,004.43 40 $4,401.51 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 894 $163,224.68 01 Project Management Plan 48 $8,398.64 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 48 $8,398.64 02 Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings 114 $26,980.67 0 $0.00 93 $9,521.84 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 55 $9,658.15 16 $1,839.97 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 278 $48,000.64 03 Subconsultant Coordination 80 $16,294.06 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 80 $16,294.06 04 Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination 188 $38,762.61 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 60 $11,346.28 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 248 $50,108.89 05 Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports 44 1 $5,949.72 0 $0.00 48 $5,016.38 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 12 $1,331.91 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 104 $12,298.02 06 1 Quality Assurance 124 $26,894.81 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 12 $1,229.62 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 136 $28,124.44 202 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 282 $64,042.04 0 $0.00 1295 $124,556.12 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $4,212.52 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,593 $192,810.68 01 Public Involvement and Communications Plan (30%-60 2 $516.77 0 $0.00 125 $12,294.21 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 127 $12,810.98 02 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up Evc 64 $16,536.79 0 $0.00 143 $13,301.55 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 207 $29,838.33 03 Public Open House Meetings (2) / Online Open Houses 132 $29,478.19 0 $0.00 509 $50,718.31 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $4,212.52 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 657 $84,409.02 04 Property Owner Briefings 16 $4,134.20 0 $0.00 1 62 $5,385.07 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 78 $9,519.26 05 Materials 60 $11,308.99 0 $0.00 416 $39,321.14 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 476 $50,630.13 06 Communication Tracking and Comment Management 8 $2,067.10 0 $0.00 40 $3,535.85 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 48 $5,602.95 203 STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION 874 $193,262.93 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 24 $2,563.03 214 $51,346.49 0 $0.00 1112 $247,172.44 01 Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan 16 $4,134.20 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $4,134.20 02 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coor 76 $14,127.85 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 76 $14,127.85 03 BNSF Meetings 136 $34,052.52 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 24 $2,563.03 64 $15,355.96 0 $0.00 224 $51,971.51 04 BNSF Design Coordination and Agreement Developme 130 $30,461.72 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 150 $35,990.53 0 $0.00 280 $66,452.25 05 BNSF 30% Submittal 132 $25,987.67 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 132 $25,987.67 06 Tribes Meetings 120 $23,182.31 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 120 $23,182.31 07 Agency Stakeholder Meetings 100 $23,883.06 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 100 $23,883.06 08 City Council Briefings 76 $16,034.87 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 76 $16,034.87 09 Technical Committee Meetings 78 $19,314.79 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 78 $19,314.79 10 Participate in Meetings with the Recreation and Conse 10 $2,083.94 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10 $2,083.94 204 SURVEY AND BASEMAP 222 $28,454.98 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 48 $4,929.13 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 270 $33,384.10 01 Existing Conditions Survey 92 $10,557.73 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 92 $10,557.73 02 BNSF Easment Support 54 $7,441.67 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 32 $3,286.08 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 86 $10,727.75 03 Exhibits and Legal Description for Property Needs 76 $10,455.59 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $1,643.04 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 92 $12,098.63 205 ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) 30% AND 60% 234 $58,583.84 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 208 $26,568.73 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1530 $178,387.58 1972 $263,540.15 01 30% Design 106 $26,045.24 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 89 $11,281.98 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 705 $79,582.49 900 $116,909.71 02 60% Design 128 $32,538.60 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 120 $15,286.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 825 $98,805.09 1,073 $146,630.44 206 URBAN DESIGN/ PARK INTEGRATION (VIA) 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 190 $24,139.91 190 $24,139.91 01 Urban Design/ Park Integration 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 190 $24,139.91 190 $24,139.91 207 IARTAND CULTURAL COLLABORATION 30% AND 60% 48 $9,959.49 284 $28,400.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 486 $56,676.45 818 $95,035.94 01 ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION 30% AND 60% 48 $9,959.49 284 $28,400.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 486 $56,676.45 818 $95,035.94 208 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR 30% DESIGN (S&W) 12 $2,862.81 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 103 $17,536.28 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 115 $20,399.10 01 Geotechnical analysis for Preferred Alternative (S&W) 12 $2,862.81 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 103 $17,536.28 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 115 $20,399.10 209 30% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 1,332 $262,771.58 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 30 $6,690.00 0 $0.00 1 414 $55,371.37 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,776 $324,832.95 01 Basis of Design 44 1 $8,799.28 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 44 $8,799.28 02 30% Engineering for the Preferred Alternative 1,288 $253,972.30 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 30 $6,690.00 0 $0.00 414 $55,371.37 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,732 $316,033.67 210 60% GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR THE PREFERRED ALT 8 $1,829.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 63 $11,572.98 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 71 $13,402.25 01 60% GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR THE PREFERRED Al8 $1,829.26 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 63 $11,572.98 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 71 $13,402.25 211 60% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 1,418 $256,171.23 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 $4,460.00 1 0 $0.00 328 1 $42,623.17 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,766 $303,254.40 01 Basis of Design 30 $8,099.15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 30 $8,099.15 02 Development of 60% Design 1,388 $248,072.08 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 $4,460.00 0 $0.00 328 $42,623.17 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,736 $295,155.25 214 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 2,222 $305,924.43 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 4 $951.15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2,226 $306,875.58 01 Verification of Requirements 30 $5,683.34 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 30 $5,683.34 02 NEPA Compliance 832 $121,436.83 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 832 $121,436.83 03 Endangered Species Act 272 $41,294.43 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 4 $951.15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 276 $42,245.58 04 National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 12 $2,989.72 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 12 $2,989.72 05 Section 4(f)/Section 6(f) 96 $13,962.20 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 96 $13,962.20 06 SEPA Checklist 101 $14,101.36 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 101 $14,101.36 07 JARPA/HPAApplication 159 $17,952.04 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 159 $17,952.04 08 Shoreline Permit 176 $20,234.19 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 176 $20,234.19 09 Critical Areas Report 206 $21,862.45 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 206 $21,862.45 10 Mitigation Design 259 $33,818.71 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 259 $33,818.71 11 Shading Calculations and Figure 44 $5,312.11 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 44 $5,312.11 12 Bridge Permit 35 $7,277.06 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 35 $7,277.06 215 IFUNDING 32 $6,872.33 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 $11,341.68 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 88 $18,214.02 01 Grant Support (Tetra Tech) 32 $6,872.33 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 $11,341.68 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 88 $18,214.02 216 COASTAL GEOMORPHOLOGY ANALYSIS (TETRA TECH) 17 $3,059.17 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 468 $62,723.97 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 485 $65,783.14 01 Basis of Analysis 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 92 $11,941.16 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 92 $11,941.16 02 Geomorphic Analysis 17 $3,059.17 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 376 $50,782.80 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 393 $53,841.98 217 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (30% Al 132 $27,338.04 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 175 $37,316.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 307 $64,654.04 01 30% Constructability and Estimate 66 $13,669.02 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 111 $23,569.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 177 $37,238.02 02 60% Constructability and Estimate 66 $13,669.02 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 64 $13,747.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 130 $27,416.02 218 RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT 8 $2,067.10 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 80 $14,803.54 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 88 $16,870.64 01 RIG HT OF WAY SUPPORT 8 $2,067.10 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 80 $14,803.54 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 88 $16,870.64 219 MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL THROUGH 60 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 01 MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL THROUGH 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 Subtotal: 7,439 $1,346,479.75 284 1 $28,400.00 1 1436 $139,094.34 225 1 $48,466.00 166 $29,109.27 1,609 $224,797.03 192 1 $26,697.20 214 $51,346.49 2,206 1 $259,203.94 13,771 $2,153,594.01 K L d E M 11 a+ C d E t t) r+ Q 06.07.2019 Packet Pg. 125 Edmond St Waterfront Connector 1.10.b EXP 1EXPENSE I $24,590.00 I I $1,508.00 I I $5,563.00 I $0.00 $1,038.00 I I $203.00 I $14,348.00 I $2,000.00 1 I $290.00 0 I $49,540.00 PHASE 2 Hours: 13,771 Cost: $2,153,594.01 Expense: $49,540.00 Management Reserve Fee: $150,000.00 Phase 2 Total: $2,353,134.01 PMX BRUCE MEYERS Envirolssues Ott Sakai Shannon Wilson Tetra Tech Tierra Row TKDA Via Total PHASE3 HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTAL COST Hours Cost 301 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 270 $57,248.88 0 $0.00 52 $5,364.74 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 33 $5,666.27 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 355 $68,279.90 01 Project Management Plan 20 $3,165.77 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 $3,165.77 02 Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings 36 $8,506.91 0 $0.00 36 $3,692.62 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 $3,452.23 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 92 $15,651.76 03 Subconsultant Coordination 38 $7,297.86 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 38 $7,297.86 04 Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination 60 $12,758.41 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 9 $1,462.83 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 69 $14,221.25 05 Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports 20 $2,791.75 0 $0.00 16 $1,672.13 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 4 $751.21 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 40 $5,215.08 06 1 Quality Assurance 96 $22,728.18 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 96 $22,728.18 302 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 154 $34,948.71 0 $0.00 635 $60,454.98 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 $2,106.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 797 $97,509.94 01 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up EVE 64 $16,536.79 0 $0.00 141 $13,133.17 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 205 $29,669.96 02 Public Open House Meetings (1) / Online Open Houses 42 $8,560.02 0 $0.00 234 $23,354.64 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 $2,106.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 284 $34,020.92 03 Property Owner Briefings 8 $2,067.10 1 0 $0.00 33 1 $2,894.29 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 41 $4,961.39 04 Materials 32 $5,717.70 0 $0.00 215 $19,987.16 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 247 $25,704.86 05 Communication Tracking and Comment Management 8 $2,067.10 0 $0.00 12 $1,085.72 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 1 $3,152.82 303 1 STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION 460 $93,582.57 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 50 $11,996.84 0 $0.00 530 $105,579.41 01 Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan 4 $1,033.55 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 4 $1,033.55 02 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coorc 108 $20,905.97 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 108 $20,905.97 03 BNSF Meetings (90%) 34 $9,010.93 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 25 $5,998.42 0 $0.00 59 $15,009.35 04 Final Submittal (90%) 102 $18,341.35 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 25 1 $5,998.42 0 $0.00 127 $24,339.77 05 Tribes Meetings (90%) 120 $23,182.31 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 120 $23,182.31 06 Agency Stakeholder Meetings (90%) 46 $10,664.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 46 $10,664.26 07 City Council Briefings (90%) 20 $4,005.93 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20 $4,005.93 08 Technical Committee Meetings (90%) 26 $6,438.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 26 $6,438.26 304 ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) (90%) 196 $43,363.88 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 21 1 $2,532.39 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 801 $95,832.66 1,018 $141,728.93 01 90% Design 196 $43,363.88 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 20.5 $2,532.39 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 801 $95,832.66 1,018 $141,728.93 305 ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION (90%) 0 $0.00 114 $11,400.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 110 $12,885.68 224 $24,285.68 01 ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION (90%) 0 $0.00 114 $11,400.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 110 $12,885.68 224 $24,285.68 306 90% ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 1,636 $298,003.94 24521 $0.00 42279 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 492 $64,964.18 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 68,928 $362,968.12 01 Basis of Design 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 02 90% Engineering for the Preferred Alternative 1,412 $255,725.36 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 464 $60,311.34 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,876 $316,036.70 03 City Permits 224 $42,278.57 24521 $0.00 42279 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 28 $4,652.84 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 67,052 $46,931.42 307 90% DESIGN GEOTECHNICAL SUPPORT 8 $2,276.21 1320 $0.00 1 2276 $0.00 0 $0.00 25 $4,084.99 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 3,629 $6,361.20 01 90% Design Geotechnical Support 8 $2,276.21 1320 $0.00 2276 $0.00 0 $0.00 25 $4,084.99 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 3,629 $6,361.20 308 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 252 $37,170.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 252 $37,170.75 01 Mitigations Plans 252 $37,170.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 252 $37,170.75 309 FUNDING SUPPORT EFFORT FOR 90% 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10,890 $6,872.33 01 Grant Support (Tetra Tech) 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10,890 $6,872.33 310 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (30% Al 120 $21,348.09 12382 $0.00 21348 $0.00 59 $12,632.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 33,909 $33,980.09 01 90% Constructability and Estimate 120 $21,348.09 12382 $0.00 21348 $0.00 59 $12,632.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 33,909 $33,980.09 218 RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10,890 $6,872.33 01 RIG HT OF WAY SUPPORT 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10,890 $6,872.33 311 MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL THROUGH 90 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 01 MANAGEMENT RESERVE FEE ADDITIONAL THROUGH 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 Subtotal: 3,160 $601,687.69 46,309 $11,400.00 80,335 $65,819.72 59 $12,632.00 25 $4,084.99 554 $75,269.11 0 $0.00 50 $11,996.84 911 $108,718.34 1 131,402 $891,608.69 EXP 1EXPENSE 1 $1,200.60 I $696.00 1 $2,943.50 1 $0.00 1 $79.00 1 $203.00 1 $0.00 1 $1,000.00 1 $145.00 1 0 1 $6,267.10 PHASE 3 Hours: 131,402 Cost: $891,608.69 Expense: $6,267.10 Management Reserve Fee: $150,000.00 Phase 3 Total: $1,047,875.79 PMX BRUCE MEYERS Envirolssues Ott Sakai Shannon Wilson Tetra Tech Tierra Row DA Via Total PHASE4 HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOSTTOTALCOST HOURS TOTALCOST HOURS TOTAL COST 401 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 270 $57,248.88 0 $0.00 53 $5,457.64 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 70 $12,199.51 0 $0.00$0.00 ffn 0 $0.00 393 $74,906.03 01 Project Management Plan 20 $3,165.77 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00$0.00 0 $0.00 20 $3,165.77 02 Weekly Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings 36 $8,506.91 0 $0.00 37 $3,785.51 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 40 $7,069.39 0 $0.00$0.00 0 $0.00 113 $19,361.82 03 Subconsultant Coordination 38 $7,297.86 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 38 $7,297.86 04 Consultant Team Meetings and Coordination 60 $12,758.41 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 18 $2,876.49 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 78 $15,634.91 05 Monthly Invoice and Progress Reports 20 $2,791.75 0 $0.00 16 $1,672.13 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 12 $2,253.62 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 48 $6,717.50 06 1 Quality Assurance 96 $22,728.18 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 96 $22,728.18 402 COMMUNITY EVENTS AND ENGAGEMENT (from 90% to 64 $15,959.47 0 $0.00 325 $29,837.03 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 389 $45,796.50 01 Informational Tables at Fairs, Festivals, and Pop-up Evc 24 $6,201.30 0 $0.00 83 $7,843.91 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 107 $14,045.20 02 Property Owner Briefings 8 $2,067.10 0 $0.00 37 $3,262.97 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 45 $5,330.07 03 Materials 8 $1,489.78 0 $0.00 160 $14,724.02 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 168 $16,213.80 04 Communication Tracking and Comment Management 24 $6,201.30 0 $0.00 45 $4,006.14 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 69 $10,207.44 403 STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION 306 $65,305.01 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 22 $5,278.61 0 $0.00 328 $70,583.62 K L d E M L IL -W C 0) E t V r+ Q 06.07.2019 Packet Pg. 126 Edmond St Waterfront Connector 1.10.b 01 Agency Stakeholder Engagement Plan 4 $1,033.55 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 4 $1,033.55 02 Environmental Resource Agencies Meetings and Coor 54 $10,452.99 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 54 $10,452.99 03 BNSF Meetings 32 $8,494.16 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 12 $2,879.24 0 $0.00 44 $11,373.40 04 Tribes Meetings 120 $23,182.31 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10 $2,399.37 0 $0.00 130 $25,581.67 05 Agency Stakeholder Meetings 46 $10,664.26 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 46 $10,664.26 06 City Council Briefings 24 $5,039.48 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 24 $5,039.48 07 Technical Committee Meetings 26 $6,438.26 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 26 $6,438.26 404 ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) 100%AND FIN 90 $20,906.71 12126 $0.00 20907 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 106 $13,156.85 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 547 $63,991.76 33,775 $98,055.32 01 ARCHITECTURAL COLLABORATION (VIA) 100% AND FIIN 90 $20,906.71 12126 $0.00 20907 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 105.5 $13,156.85 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 547 $63,991.76 33775.0002 $98,055.32 405 ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATION 25 $6,459.68 80 $8,000.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 106 $11,683.23 211 $26,142.91 01 ART AND CULTURAL COLLABORATIOM 25 $6,459.68 80 $8,000.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 106 $11,683.23 211 $26,142.91 406 FINAL ENGINEERING FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 865 $155,247.99 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 175 $23,033.65 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1,040 $178,281.64 01 Basis of Design 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 02 Final Engineering for the Preferred Alternative 767 $140,818.29 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 175 $23,033.65 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 942 $163,851.94 03 Mitigation Design to 100%and Final 98 $14,429.70 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 98 $14,429.70 407 CONSTRUCTABILITY REVIEWS AND ESTIMATING (OTT -Si 36 $8,742.33 5071 $0.00 8742 $0.00 59 $12,632.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 13,908 $21,374.33 01 90% Constructability and Estimate 36 $8,742.33 5071 $0.00 8742 $0.00 59 $12,632.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 13907.837 $21,374.33 408 FUNDING 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 $11,341.68 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 10,946 $18,214.02 01 Funding 32 $6,872.33 3986 $0.00 6872 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 56 1 $11,341.68 0 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 10,946 $18,214.02 409 BID SUPPORT 284 $64,429.44 37369 $0.00 64429 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $2,640.47 22 $3,254.59 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 266 $34,079.55 102,386 $104,404.04 01 Develop Addendums 208 $45,213.20 26223 $0.00 45213 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 140 $16,618.68 71,785 $61,831.88 02 AnswerRFI's 48 $12,261.20 7111 $0.00 12261 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $2,640.47 20 $2,942.35 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 60 $8,189.27 19,517 $26,033.29 03 Participate in Pre -Bid Meetings 16 $3,994.29 2317 $0.00 3994 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $312.24 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 16 $1,962.88 6,345 $6,269.41 04 Review Bids 12 $2,960.74 1717 $0.00 2961 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 50 $7,308.72 4,740 $10,269.46 410 MANAGEMENT RESERVE (100%AND FINAL) 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 01 Mangagement Reserve 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 1 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 1 0 1 $0.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Subtotal:1 1,972 1 $401,171.84 58,631 $8,000.00 101,329 $35,294.67 59 $12,632.00 16 $2,640.47 428 $62,986.28 0 $0.00 1 22 1 $5,278.61 919 $309,754.54 163,376 $637,758.42 EXP 1EXPENSE $800.40 $232.00 $1,076.00 $0.00 $5.00 $0.00 $0.00 $504.60 $87.00 0 $2,705.00 PHASE 4 Hours: 163,376 Cost: $637,758.42 Expense: $2,705.00 Management Reserve Fee: $50,000.00 Phase 4Total: $690,463.42 PMX I BRUCE MEYERS Envirolssues Ott Sakai Shannon Wilson Tetra Tech Tierra Row TKDA I Via I Total TOTAL PROJECT AMOUNT:1 12,571 1 $2,375,930.29 1 105,224 1 $50,236.00 1 183,099 1 $249,791.24 343 $73,730.00 207 1 $36,956.72 2,591 1 $363,458.41 192 $41,045.20 286 $72,126.54 1 3,846 1 $478,198.82 1 308,359 $3,741,473.21 Management Reserve $350,000.00 Project Total $4,091,473.21 X L d E M L 11 m E a 06.07.2019 Packet Pg. 127 2.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Discussion Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History Staff presented the draft Fund Balance Reserve Policy to the Full Council on May 7th to solicit feedback and suggested changes to the draft policy. During the meeting Council requested that the policy include additional information regarding the reserve replenishment plan. The draft policy has been updated to include: 1) A timeline for when the replenishment plan would be presented to Council. 2) Who is responsible to preparing and presenting the plan. 3) Amount of reserves used. 4) Whether it is anticipated additional reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, and 5) If no additional reserves are needed, then the report to Council must include a plan to replenish the used reserves. The City Council Finance Committee last reviewed the draft Fund Balance Policy on March 12, 2019. Here are the key takeaways from past Committee discussions: Finance Committee has the opinion that the Risk Management Reserve can be discontinued and balance of the Risk Management Reserve can be combined with the General Fund. The chart below shows use of Risk Management funds over the past five years. Ultimately, after Council discusses this as a study item, it will need to be brought back to Council for a formal vote to either keep or discontinue the fund. Prior Fh-e Year of Risk Managenient Fund Expenditure History % of General Fund Revenue Year Expenditures Description of Use Budget 2018 $0 None Expended 0.0% 2017 $81,277 Claim Settlement 0.2% 2016 $0 lone Expended 0.0% 2015 S71,528 Clang Settlement 0.2% 2014 $0 None Expended 0.0% There was consensus we need clearer financial policies to guide us as we move forward, especially with regard to fund balance and reserves. MRSC recommends reserves of at least 16% of operating expenses. There is currently a fairly wide range of reserve levels in nearby Packet Pg. 128 2.1 cities. Each city needs to consider how much risk they are willing to take as they establish reserve levels. Those that have stable revenue streams are prone to take more risk by maintaining reserve levels below 16% while those with greater revenue volatility have a more conservative approach and maintain reserves higher than that level. Attached to this Agenda Memo is a Fund Balance Reserve Policy Summary From Other Cities. There was agreement we need to keep our policies as simple as possible, recognizing there is a need for at enough detail to inform future administrators and Councilmembers of terminology and the need for certain reserve funds. The Committee agreed our policies should strive to maintain sufficient reserve levels to sustain city operations during economic downturns or natural disasters while not being excessive, as we don't want to create a "dead money" situation. The essential thing here is for Council to come to agree on what we believe is "sufficient" for reserve levels. The updated draft policy now calls for a total combined fund reserves not to exceed 20% of the Adopted General Fund Operating Revenue Budget. The 20% fund balance target shall 1) not exceed the limitations set forth by RCW 35A.33.145, which sets the statutory maximum at $0.375 per $1,000 of assessed valuation and 2) when combined with the General Fund Operating Reserve, the two fund balance reserves shall not exceed 20% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Revenue Operating Budget. In other words, if the General Fund Operating Reserve balance equals 16% of operating budget, then the Contingent Reserve Fund balance cannot exceed 4% of the operating budget The current Fund Balance policy does not incorporate Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncement No.54. This pronouncement mandates the inclusion of Fund Balance Classifications in the City's Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The attachment includes a summary of this Pronouncement. Please see attachment: GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summary. Staff Recommendation Review Amended policy and supporting documents, provide feedback and recommendations. Narrative N/A Attachments: Draft City of Edmonds Reserve Management Policy For June 2019 Reserve Policy GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summary RCW 35A.33.145 Contingency Reserve Fund Limitations GFOA Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund Fund Balance Reserve Policy Summary From Other Cities 2019 May 7 Council Fund Balance Presentation Which Finance Policies Work Best It Depends Packet Pg. 129 2.1.a City of Edmonds r I890 k��0 DRAFT Fund Balance Reserve Policy June2019 Packet Pg. 130 2.1.a Table of Contents DRAFT.........................................................................................................................................1 ARTICLE I INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................3 ARTICLE II CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE FUND BALANCE RESERVE LEVELS........................................................................................................................................4 Section1. Volatility.....................................................................................................................4 Section2. Operating Fund Size.....................................................................................................4 Section 3. Purpose of Fund Balance Reserves.................................................................................4 Section4. Bond Ratings...............................................................................................................4 ARTICLE III COMMITTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE RESERVES POLICY .............................4 Section 1. Establishment and Purpose of Operating General Fund Operating Reserve .........................4 ARTICLE IV CONTINGENT RESERVE FUND BALANCE POLICY...............................................5 ARTICLE V ANNUAL FUND BALANCE TYPES - STATUS REPORT............................................7 ARTICLE VI FIVE-YEAR RESERVE RATE REVIEW....................................................................7 ARTICLE VII DEVIATIONS FROM POLICY.................................................................................7 ARTICLE VIII DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................7 ARTICLE IX EFFECTIVE DATE..................................................................................................10 Page 2 Packet Pg. 131 2.1.a ARTICLE I INTRODUCTION The overall objective of Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is to define that portion of fund balance that is unavailable to support the current budget. In many ways, fund balance represents working capital, which can either be used as a liquidity reserve or for spending in future years. A comprehensive fund balance/reserve management policy provides guidelines for the major funds of the City of Edmonds and provides a structured approach in setting reserve levels in specifically designated funds. This Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is intended to guide prudent use of resources to provide for the much needed services to taxpayers and to maintain sound management policies. It is essential that governments maintain adequate levels of fund balance reserves to mitigate risks and provide a back-up for revenue shortfalls. Policy It is the policy of the City of Edmonds to provide for the continuity of City government by planning ahead for economic uncertainties and unforeseen or unplanned major expenditures. In order to achieve reserve goals the City must exercise prudent debt and liability management policies and follow sound fiscal management policies that prioritize the City's core services. This policy establishes reserve fund balance accounts that will provide funding for emergencies, economic uncertainties and for unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls. In addition, this policy incorporates provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement (GASB) no. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. Objectives The purpose of this Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is to assist the City in the pursuit of the following equally important objectives: 1. Build adequate reserves which will provide the City the resources necessary for financial stabilization, particularly during times of unforeseen emergencies and economic downturns; 2. Establish sound fiscal reserve policies that will serve as the foundation for ensuring that strong fiscal management policies guide future City decisions; 3. Provide prudent guidelines regarding the establishment, use and replenishment of City committed or assigned fund balances/reserves; 4. Establish a process for periodic reporting and review of the City's various fund balances (reserves); and 5. Enhance the City's credit ratings received from rating institutions through the establishment of clearly delineated Fund/Reserve policies that promote strong fiscal management; 6. Establish reserve policies that are in full compliance with GASB 54 financial reporting requirements. Page 3 Packet Pg. 132 2.1.a ARTICLE II CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE FUND BALANCE RESERVE LEVELS There are key elements that must be reviewed and analyzed to determine the appropriate size of a given fund balance reserve. Failure to follow the guidelines established in this policy can result in developing unattainable fund reserve goals or unsustainable fund balance reserve levels. The following criteria shall be used in determining the appropriate fund balance reserve levels: Section 1. Volatility The predictability and/or the volatility of its revenues or its expenditures (i.e., higher levels of fund balance reserves may be needed if significant revenue sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are highly volatile). Section 2.Operating Fund Size The overall size of the fund's budgetary events should be taken into consideration in setting the required fund balance reserve level and type for a particular fund. Section 3. Purpose of Fund Balance Reserves Another consideration for determining the size of each reserve will be the purpose of the reserve: Is there significant or perceived exposure to one-time outlays (e.g., disasters, immediate capital needs, state budget cuts, or are there potential drains upon fund resources from other funds, or conversely, are there potential reductions in funding transfers from other funds)? Section 4. Bond Ratings The potential impact on the entity's bond ratings and the corresponding increased cost of borrowed funds. ARTICLE III COMMITTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE RESERVES POLICY This Policy shall establish a committed fund balance reserve within the General Fund, define funding levels and call the reserve the General Fund Operating Reserve. The purpose of the reserve is for meeting economic uncertainties, and unanticipated expenses or revenue shortfalls. This Policy requires the City to establish and maintain a General Fund Operating Reserve, within the General Fund, in an amount equal to or greater than 16% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Operating Expenditure Budget. If it is determined that the reserve balances are not adequate, the Finance Director shall propose an amendment to these policies. A detailed accounting of this reserve account will be maintained by the Finance Department to show deposits, withdrawals (when authorized pursuant to policies contained herein) and interest earned. All accounting for these accounts shall be recorded in the City's ERP system. A detailed report, prepared by the Finance Department, shall be presented annually to the Council. Section 1. Establishment and Purpose of Operating General Fund Operating Reserve A separate balance sheet account shall be setup by the Finance Director for the General Fund Operating Reserve, to be used in instances of fiscal emergencies that include: economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies and unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls. Page 4 Packet Pg. 133 2.1.a The Mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency based upon one of the following: 1) A natural catastrophe; 2) An immediate threat to health and public safety; or 3) A significant decline in General Fund revenues. The fiscal emergency declared by the Mayor must be approved by a simple majority of the City Council. Limitations of Fund Use Any use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserves shall be used only in cases of fiscal emergency and shall not be used to augment ongoing budgetary/operating spending increases. The committed General Fund Operating Reserve may also be used for one-time non -reoccurring expenditures and/or capital projects (operations and maintenance shall not be included), all as submitted by the Mayor and approved by the Council. The amount of funds to be withdrawn from this committed fund balance reserve shall be determined by the Mayor. In his/her presentation to the Council, the Mayor or his/her designee shall include a detailed list of how the funds will be applied. A simple majority vote of the Council shall be required to approve the amount and use of funds. Transition Policy Council adoption of this policy will trigger moving an amount not less than 16% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual OperatingExpendiWre Budg�unrestricted fund balance to the General Fund Operating Reserve. Committed Fund Bala General Fund Operating Reserve Replenishment If any use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserve has occurred, the Finance Director must present to Mayor and City Council an annual Replenishment Report during the month of November. The Replenishment Report must be presented each year, until the Reserves are fully replenished. The Replenishment Report must include the following information: 1) Amount of Reserves used 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels. The committed_ General Fund Reserve shall be restored pursuant to the guidelines delineated below: 1) If a reserve is drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 3 year period. 2) If a reserve is drawn down by 11-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3) If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. ARTICLE IV CONTINGENT RESERVE FUND BALANCE POLICY Page 5 Packet Pg. 134 2.1.a This Policy shall establish a fund and define funding levels for a committed Fund Balance Reserve to be called the Contingent Reserve Fund. The primary purpose of the reserve is for meeting emergencies of the City and, secondarily, if the General Fund Operating Reserve have been exhausted, the Contingent Reserve Fund can be use in times of economic uncertainties, and for unanticipated expenses or revenue shortfalls. The target balance of the Reserve shall 1) not exceed the limitations set forth by RCW 35A.33.145, which sets the statutory maximum at $0.375 per $1,000 of assessed valuation and 2) when combined with the General Fund Operating Reserve, the two fund balance reserves shall not exceed 20% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Operating Expenditure Budget. In other words, if the General Fund Operating Reserve balance equals 16% of operating budget, then the Contingent Reserve Fund balance cannot exceed 4% of the operating budget. It further requires a simple majority vote of Council with a statement declaring the reason for their use. A detailed accounting of the Fund shall be maintained by the Finance Department to show deposits, withdrawals (when authorized pursuant to policies contained herein) and be presented annually to the Council. The Mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency based upon one of the following: 1) A natural catastrophe; 2) An immediate threat to health and public safety; or 3) A significant economic decline in General Fund revenues. The fiscal emergency declared by the Mayor must be approved by a simple majority of the City Council. Limitations of Fund Use Any use of the committed Contingent Reserves shall be used in cases of fiscal emergency, shall not be used to augment ongoing budgetary/operating spending increases and should be used only after the General Fund Operating Reserves have been exhausted or when City Council approves specific used of the committed Contingent Reserve for one-time non -reoccurring expenditures and/or capital projects (operations and maintenance shall not be included). The amount of funds to be withdrawn from this committed fund balance reserve shall be determined by the Mayor. In his/her presentation to the Council, the Mayor or his/her designee shall include a detailed list of how the funds will be applied. A simple majority vote of the Council shall be required to approve the amount and use of funds. Contingent Reserve Replenishment If any use of the committed Contingent Reserve has occurred, the Finance Director must present to Mayor and City Council an annual Replenishment Report during the month of November. The Replenishment Report must be presented each year, until the Reserves are fully replenished. The Replenishment Report must include the following information: 1) Amount of Reserves used 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels. The committed Contingent Reserve shall be restored pursuant to the guidelines delineated below: 1) If a reserve is drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a I to 3 year period. Page 6 Packet Pg. 135 2.1.a 2) If a reserve is drawn down by 11-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3) If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. ARTICLE V ANNUAL FUND BALANCE TYPES - STATUS REPORT Once a year, in August, the City Finance Director shall present to the Council Finance Committee a comprehensive report on the City's fund balance reserve types as of June 30th. The report shall include an updated fund balance reserve level for each fund balance type. This report shall include the following funds: 1. General Fund Operating Reserve balance; 2. Contingency Reserve Fund balance. ARTICLE VI FIVE-YEAR RESERVE RATE REVIEW Every five years, during the annual budget hearings, the Mayor, based upon a comprehensive financial and economic review of all City fund balance types and in consultation with the City Finance Director, and Department Directors as necessary, shall make recommendations to the City Council for either maintaining existing fund balance reserve polices or revising fund balance reserve policies including percentage ranges established by category herein and replenishment requirements by categories established herein. ARTICLE VII DEVIATIONS FROM POLICY No deviations from the fund balance reserve polices set forth in this Policy will be allowed except as approved by a simple majority of vote by the Council. This includes any increase or decrease in the base fund balance reserve levels established by this policy and expenditures from fund balance reserve accounts for anything other than the intended budgeted use of said fund balance. ARTICLE VIII DEFINITIONS Budget - A plan of financial operation containing an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given period (usually a fiscal year) and a proposed forecast of revenues (receipts) to cover them. A budget is also a plan that outlines an organization's financial and operational goals and strategies in monetary terms. Capital Expenditures are expenditures incurred when monies are spent either to buy fixed assets or to add to the value of an existing fixed asset with a useful life that extends beyond the fiscal year. In accounting, a capital expenditure is added to an asset account ("capitalized"), thus increasing the asset's basis (the cost or value of an asset). The general rule (even for municipalities) is that if the property acquired has a useful life longer than the fiscal year, the cost must be capitalized. The capital expenditure costs are then amortized or depreciated over the life of the asset in question. Page 7 Packet Pg. 136 2.1.a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) - A CAFR is a set of financial statements for a state, municipality or other governmental entity that comply with the accounting requirements established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). It must be audited by an independent auditor using generally accepted government auditing standards. The CAFR consists of three sections: Introductory, Financial and Statistical. The Introductory section orients and guides the reader through the report. The Financial section presents the entity's basic financial statements as well as notes to the statements and the independent auditors' report. The Statistical section provides additional financial and statistical data, including data about financial trends that may better inform the reader about the government's activities. Council - Means the legislative body (the city council) that governs the City of Edmonds. Expenditure - The actual payment of cash or cash equivalent for goods delivered or services rendered, or a charge against available funds in settlement of an obligation as evidenced by an invoice, voucher or other such document during the fiscal year. For governmental reporting purposes, expenditures include expenses or a provision for debt retirement not reported as a liability of the fund from which retired. Fiscal Year - A 12 month period to which the annual operating budget applies and the end of which a governmental unit determines its financial position and the results of its operations. The City has specified January 1 through December 31 as its fiscal year. Fund - A fund is a self -balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and "residual" equity or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain planned objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions or limitations. Fund Balances - The overall objective of fund balance reporting is to isolate that portion of a fund balance that is unavailable to support the following period's budget (see GASB 54 definition below). In general, an unassigned fund balance shall be defined as those amounts that are not restricted, committed, or assigned, of a particular fund at the end of the fiscal year. GASB 54 - Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions - The City of Edmonds's CAFR Financial Statements are required to comply with GASB 54 beginning with its Fiscal Year End 2011 CAFR going forward. GASB 54 changes and identifies fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied by clarifying existing governmental fund type definitions. Fund balance is basically the difference between the assets and liabilities reported in a fund. GASB statement No. 54 provides the following five categories for classifying fund balance and related definitions to be used for describing the components of fund balance: 1. Nonspendable Fund Balance Amounts that are not in a spendable form or are required to be maintained intact. Due to the nature or form of the resources, they generally cannot be expected to be converted into cash or a spendable form (e.g. Inventories and prepaid amounts). This also Page 8 Packet Pg. 137 2.1.a includes long-term loan and notes receivable and property held for resale. Applies as well to amounts that must be retained intact legally or contractually. 2. Restricted Fund Balance — Amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated. Constraints are placed on the use of resources by external parties (e.g. by creditors, grant providers, contributors) or by laws or regulations (e.g. constitution or legally enforceable language). Restrictions may be changed or lifted only with the consent of the resource provider. 3. Committed Fund Balance — Amounts can only be used for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of City Council. Constraints on fund balance use are imposed by internal formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority (e.g. City Council) and can only be removed or changed by taking the same type of action it employed to commit those amounts through legislation, resolution, or ordinance (e.g. funds committed to satisfy contractual obligations). Action to constrain resources must occur prior to year-end; however the amount can be determined in the subsequent period. 4. Assigned Fund Balance — Assigned fund balances include amounts that are limited by the Council, Mayor, or his/her designee, for its intended use, but little or no formal action is required to modify or eliminate those limitations. Assigned fund balances comprises amounts intended to be used for a specific purpose. Amounts reported as assigned should not result in a deficit in unassigned fund balance. Also relates to all governmental funds other than the General Fund, with any remaining positive amounts not classified as nonspendable, restricted or committed. 5. Unassigned Fund Balance — Comprises the residual classification for the General Fund and includes all amounts not contained in the other classifications. Unassigned amounts are available for any purpose. This represents the residual amount of the fund balance that has not been restricted, committed, or assigned. General Fund - In public sector accounting, the General Fund is the primary operating fund for all revenues of the City that are not otherwise restricted as to their use, including monies from local property and sales tax, and other revenue sources that are not assigned for a specific purpose. The General Fund provides the resources necessary to pay/sustain the day-to-day activities for City services such as administration, community services, parks and recreation, police, fire, public works, elected officials, Mayor, and City Council. When governments or administrators talk about "balancing the budget" they typically mean balancing the budget for their general fund. Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) - GASB is the private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that works to create and improve the rules U.S. state and local governments follow when accounting for their finances and reporting them to the public. While the GASB does not have the power to enforce compliance with the standards it promulgates, the authority for its standards is recognized under the Rules of Conduct of the AICPA. Also, legislation in many states requires compliance with GASB standards, and governments usually are expected to prepare financial statements in accordance with those standards when they issue bonds or notes or otherwise borrow from public credit markets. The GASB was established in 1984 and is funded by publication sales, contributions from state and local governments, and voluntary assessment fees from municipal bond issues. Operating Budget — A detailed projection of all estimated income and expenses based on forecasted revenue during a given period (usually one year). Since an operating budget is a short-term budget, capital outlays are excluded because they are long-term costs. One-time revenues, such as grants, settlements, Page 9 Packet Pg. 138 2.1.a sales of assets and transfers are excluded because often they are non -recurring sources of revenues and cannot be counted on coming in from one budget cycle to the next. Revenue - The income of a government from all sources appropriated for the payment of the public expenses. It includes such items as tax payments, fees from specific services, receipts from other governments, fines, forfeitures, grants, shared revenues and interest income. Structural Budget Deficit or "Gap" - A budget deficit (Gap) that results from a fundamental imbalance whereby current year governmental expenditures exceed current year revenues without any consideration of carryover or prior year unspent revenue balances if they exist. A structural deficit remains across the operating fiscal cycle because the general level of government spending is too high for the prevailing revenue structure (e.g., taxes, fees and other sources). A fiscal Gap, is a structural budget deficit over an extended period of time and not only includes the structural deficit at a given point in time but also the difference between promised future government commitments, such as health and retirement spending, and future planned or anticipated tax and other revenues. Another description is that the current revenue structure is insufficient to maintain services at the current level. ARTICLE IX EFFECTIVE DATE This policy shall take effect upon its final adoption by the City Council. Page 10 Packet Pg. 139 2.1.b 1.0 2.0 3.0 Subject: Reserve Policy CITY OF EDMONDS RESERVE POLICY Original Policy Date: Originating Department: Finance Division Last Revision Date: PURPOSE: To establish a Reserve Policy for the City which is capable of addressing the various types (categories) of the City's operating and restricted use funds. The objectives of this Policy are to (i) provide a clear understanding of the goals and objectives of reserve establishment, (ii) offer guidance and limitations regarding the establishment, use and replenishment of City reserves, and (iii) establish a process for periodic reporting and review of City reserves. ORANANIZATION AFFECTED: All City funds. REFERENCES: GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY: The General Fund is used to account for all general revenues of the City not specifically levied or collected for other City funds, and for expenditures related to providing general services by the City. For the purpose of this policy and as it applies to the General Fund only, the City will establish a Contingency Reserve Fund with a minimum balance of 8% of annual General Fund revenues. At no time, however, shall the balance in the Contingency Reserve Fund fall below 8% unless specifically waived by the City Council because of an unforeseen emergency. The City shall maintain a targeted balance of 16% of annual General Fund revenues. 4.1 If actual expenditures in the General Fund are less than budgeted expenditures, and the General Fund does not end the year at a deficit, at least 5% of the difference between actual revenue and actual expenditures will revert to the Contingency Reserve Fund and may then be re -appropriated at the discretion of the City Council. 4.2 The City will annually direct a minimum of 5% of sales tax receipts from new construction (NAICS Industry Classification Code 23) to the Contingency Reserve Fund, up to $100,000 per year. Packet Pg. 140 2.1.b 4.3 Total annual transfers to the Contingency Reserve Fund shall not be more than 125% of the amounts calculated in Sections 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 above. Once funded up to the 16% target, there shall be no limitation on the maximum annual contribution to the Contingency Reserve Fund. 4.4 Use of Contingency Reserve Fund — To the extent that there is an imbalance in the General Fund between budgeted revenues and budgeted expenditures, City Council and administration will strive to address the imbalance first with revenue increases, expenditure reductions, or a combination of the two. Use of the Contingency Reserve Fund is a one-time, non -recurring funding source. If an imbalance in the General Fund occurs that cannot be addressed with additional revenues or expenditure reductions, a multiyear plan shall be developed to address the imbalance concurrently with the planned reserve draw down of the Contingency Fund. The implementation of the replenishment plan will be done in accordance with the guidelines below (see "Replenishment of Reserves"). A planned draw down of the fund's reserves should: a) not exceed 50% of the balance in the Contingency Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 4% of annual General Fund revenues. 4.5 Replenishment of Reserves — The following criteria will be used to restore the Contingency Reserve Fund based upon the remaining fund balance compared to the minimum reserve guideline: 1. If the reserves are drawn down by 25-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. 2. If the reserves are drawn down by 10-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3. If the reserves are drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 3 year period. 4.6 Annual Status Reporting and Periodic Review — Annually, after presentation of the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the Finance Director will prepare and present an updated Reserve Level Status report by August 1 st of the following year. 4.7 At least every five years, the Mayor, based on advice from the Finance Director, will ask the City Council to reaffirm or revise this policy, including the percentages established herein. 2 Packet Pg. 141 2.1.b 5.0 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE POLICY: 5.1. The City shall maintain a Risk Management Reserve Fund dedicated to mitigation of the risk of loss arising from potential claims and lawsuits against the City for general liability purposes as well as claims resulting from natural disasters such as earthquakes. Amounts not needed for current or estimated future claims will be made available along with the Contingency Reserve Fund in Section 4 for unanticipated expenditures or significant declines in actual revenue versus budgeted revenue. 5.2. The Risk Management Reserve Fund shall be set at 2% of annual General Fund revenues. The City shall reach the target of 2% no later than fiscal year 2014. 5.3. Legal claims expenses incurred below the City's insurance deductible amounts will be paid for out of the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Uninsured legal claim expenses will also be deducted from the Risk Management Reserve Fund. 5.4. Use of the Risk Management Reserve Fund — A draw down of the fund's reserves should: a) not exceed 50% of the balance in the Risk Management Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 0.5% of annual General Fund revenues. Council may grant exceptions to this limitation on draw down of reserves at its discretion. Any exception granted will be adopted as part of the City's annual budgeting process. 5.5. Replenishment of Reserves — The following criteria will be used to restore the Risk Management Reserve Fund based upon the remaining fund balance compared to the minimum reserve guideline: 1. If the reserves are drawn down by 25-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 3 to 5 year period. 2. If the reserves are drawn down by 10-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 2 to 3 year period. 3. If the reserves are drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 2 year period. 5.6. The City Council may, at their discretion and as necessary, transfer funds between the Contingency Reserve Fund and the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Once the two reserve funds are fully funded up to the minimum levels as established within this policy, at no time will the combined balances of both funds decline below 8% of annual General Fund revenues without adopting of a replenishment plan. Packet Pg. 142 2.1.c GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summar The objective of this Statement is to enhance the usefulness of fund balance information by providing clearer fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied and by clarifying the existing governmental fund type definitions. This Statement establishes fund balance classifications that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to which a government is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of the resources reported in governmental funds. The initial distinction that is made in reporting fund balance information is identifying amounts that are considered nonspendable, such as fund balance associated with inventories. This Statement also provides for additional classification as restricted, committed, assigned, and unassigned based on the relative strength of the constraints that control how specific amounts can be spent. The restricted fund balance category includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by constitution, external resource providers, or through enabling legislation. The committed fund balance classification includes amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority. Amounts in the assigned fund balance classification are intended to be used by the government for specific purposes but do not meet the criteria to be classified as restricted or committed. In governmental funds other than the general fund, assigned fund balance represents the remaining amount that is not restricted or committed. Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the government's general fund and includes all spendable amounts not contained in the other classifications. In other funds, the unassigned classification should be used only to report a deficit balance resulting from overspending for specific purposes for which amounts had been restricted, committed, or assigned. Governments are required to disclose information about the processes through which constraints are imposed on amounts in the committed and assigned classifications. Governments also are required to classify and report amounts in the appropriate fund balance classifications by applying their accounting policies that determine whether restricted, committed, assigned, and unassigned amounts are considered to have been spent. Disclosure of the policies in the notes to the financial statements is required. This Statement also provides guidance for classifying stabilization amounts on the face of the balance sheet and requires disclosure of certain information about stabilization arrangements in the notes to the financial statements. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting The requirements in this Statement will improve financial reporting by providing fund balance categories and classifications that will be more easily understood. Elimination of the reserved component of fund balance in favor of a restricted classification will enhance the consistency between information reported in the government -wide statements and information in the governmental fund financial statements and avoid confusion about the relationship between reserved fund balance and restricted net assets. The fund balance classification approach in this Statement will require governments to classify amounts consistently, regardless of the fund type or column in which they are presented. As a result, an amount cannot be classified as restricted in one fund but unrestricted in another. The fund balance disclosures will give users information necessary to understand the Packet Pg. 143 2.1.c processes under which constraints are imposed upon the use of resources and how those constraints may be modified or eliminated. The clarifications of the governmental fund type definitions will reduce uncertainty about which resources can or should be reported in the respective fund types. Nonsoendable Fund Balance The nonspendable fund balance classification includes amounts that cannot be spent because they are either (a) not in spendable form or (b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. The "not in spendable form" criterion includes items that are not expected to be converted to cash, for example, inventories and prepaid amounts. It also includes the long-term amount of loans and notes receivable, as well as property acquired for resale. However, if the use of the proceeds from the collection of those receivables or from the sale of those properties is restricted, committed, or assigned, then they should be included in the appropriate fund balance classification (restricted, committed, or assigned), rather than nonspendable fund balance. The corpus (or principal) of a permanent fund is an example of an amount that is legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. Restricted Fund Balance Net Assets Restricted by Enabling Legislation, should be reported as restricted fund balance. Fund balance should be reported as restricted when constraints placed on the use of resources are either: a. Externally imposed by creditors (such as through debt covenants), grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments; or Imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Enabling legislation, as the term is used in this Statement, authorizes the government to assess, levy, charge, or otherwise mandate payment of resources (from external resource providers) and includes a legally enforceable requirement that those resources be used only for the specific purposes stipulated in the legislation. Legal enforceability means that a government can be compelled by an external party — such as citizens, public interest groups, or the judiciary —to use resources created by enabling legislation only for the purposes specified by the legislation. Committed Fund Balance Amounts that can only be used for specific purposes pursuant to constraints imposed by formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority should be reported as committed fund balance. Those committed amounts cannot be used for any other purpose unless the government removes or changes the specified use by taking the same type of action (for example, legislation, resolution, ordinance) it employed to previously commit those amounts. The authorization specifying the purposes for which amounts can be used should have the consent of both the legislative and executive branches of the government, if applicable. Committed fund balance also should incorporate contractual obligations to the extent that existing resources in the fund have been specifically committed for use in satisfying those contractual requirements. In contrast to fund balance that is restricted by enabling legislation, as discussed above, amounts in the committed fund balance classification may be redeployed for other purposes with appropriate due process, as explained below. Constraints imposed on the use of committed amounts are imposed by the government, separate from the authorization to raise the underlying revenue. Packet Pg. 144 2.1.c The formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority that commits fund balance to a specific purpose should occur prior to the end of the reporting period, but the amount, if any, which will be subject to the constraint, may be determined in the subsequent period. Assiened Fund Balance Amounts that are constrained by the government's intent to be used for specific purposes, but are neither restricted nor committed, should be reported as assigned fund balance, except for stabilization arrangements, as discussed below. Intent should be expressed by (a) the governing body itself or (b) a body (a budget or finance committee, for example) or official to which the governing body has delegated the authority to assign amounts to be used for specific purposes. Both the committed and assigned fund balance classifications include amounts that have been constrained to being used for specific purposes by actions taken by the government itself. However, the authority for making an assignment is not required to be the government's highest level of decision - making authority. Furthermore, the nature of the actions necessary to remove or modify an assignment is not as prescriptive as it is with regard to the committed fund balance classification. Constraints imposed on the use of assigned amounts are more easily removed or modified than those imposed on amounts that are classified as committed. Some governments may not have both committed and assigned fund balances, as not all governments have multiple levels of decision -making authority. Unassigned Fund Balance Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the general fund. This classification represents fund balance that has not been assigned to other funds and that has not been restricted, committed, or assigned to specific purposes within the general fund. The general fund should be the only fund that reports a positive unassigned fund balance amount. Stabilization Arraneements Some governments formally set aside amounts for use in emergency situations or when revenue shortages or budgetary imbalances arise. Those amounts are subject to controls that dictate the circumstances under which they can be spent. Many governments have formal arrangements to maintain amounts for budget or revenue stabilization, working capital needs, contingencies or emergencies, and other similarly titled purposes. The authority to set aside those amounts generally comes from statute, ordinance, resolution, charter, or constitution. Stabilization amounts may be expended only when certain specific circumstances exist. The formal action that imposes the parameters for spending should identify and describe the specific circumstances under which a need for stabilization arises. Those circumstances should be such that they would not be expected to occur routinely. For example, a stabilization amount that can be accessed "in an emergency" would not qualify to be classified within the committed category because the circumstances or conditions that constitute an emergency are not sufficiently detailed, and it is not unlikely that an "emergency" of some nature would routinely occur. Similarly, a stabilization amount that can be accessed to offset an "anticipated revenue shortfall" would not qualify unless the shortfall was quantified and was of a magnitude that would distinguish it from other revenue shortfalls that occur during the normal course of governmental operations. Packet Pg. 145 2.1.c Fund Balance Classification Policies and Procedures Governments should disclose the following about their fund balance classification policies and procedures in the notes to the financial statements: a. For committed fund balance: (1) the government's highest level of decision -making authority and (2) the formal action that is required to be taken to establish (and modify or rescind) a fund balance commitment b. For assigned fund balance: (1) the body or official authorized to assign amounts to a specific purpose and (2) the policy established by the governing body pursuant to which that authorization is given Governments that establish stabilization arrangements, should disclose the following information in the notes to the financial statements: a. The authority for establishing stabilization arrangements (for example, by statute or ordinance) b. The requirements for additions to the stabilization amount C. The conditions under which stabilization amounts may be spent d. The stabilization balance, if not apparent on the face of the financial statements. Minimum Fund Balance Policies If a governing body has formally adopted a minimum fund balance policy (for example, in lieu of separately setting aside stabilization amounts), the government should describe in the notes to its financial statements the policy established by the government that sets forth the minimum amount. Packet Pg. 146 RCW 35A.33.145: Contingency fund —Creation. Page 1 of 1 2.1.d RCW 35A.33.145 Contingency fund —Creation. Every code city may create and maintain a contingency fund to provide moneys with which to meet any municipal expense, the necessity or extent of which could not have been foreseen or reasonably evaluated at the time of adopting the annual budget, or from which to provide moneys for those emergencies described in RCW 35A.33.080 and 35A.33.090. Such fund may be supported by a budget appropriation from any tax or other revenue source not restricted in use by law, or also may be supported by a transfer from other unexpended or decreased funds made available by ordinance as set forth in RCW 35A.33.120: PROVIDED, That the total amount accumulated in such fund at any time shall not exceed the equivalent of thirty-seven and one-half cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation of property within the city at such time. Any moneys in the contingency fund at the end of the fiscal year shall not lapse except upon reappropriation by the council to another fund in the adoption of a subsequent budget. [ 1973 1st ex.s. c 195 § 28; 1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.33.145.1 NOTES: Severability—Effective dates and termination dates—Construction-1973 1st ex.s. c 195: See notes following RCW 84.52.043. http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=35A.33.145 Packet Pg. 147 4/20/2018 2.1.e Government Finonce Officers Associotion Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund Type: Best Practice Background: In the context of financial reporting, the term fund balance is used to describe the net position of governmental funds calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Budget professionals commonly use this same term to describe the net position of governmental funds calculated on a government's budgetary basis.' While in both cases fund balance is intended to serve as a measure of the financial resources available in a governmental fund; it is essential that differences between GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance be fully appreciated. GAAP financial statements report up to five separate categories of fund balance based on the type and source of constraints placed on how resources can be spent (presented in descending order from most constraining to least constraining): nonspendable fund balance, restricted fund balance, committed fund balance, assigned fund balance, and unassigned fund balance.' The total of the amounts in these last three categories (where the only constraint on spending, if any, is imposed by the government itself) is termed unrestricted fund balance. In contrast, budgetary fund balance, while it is subject to the same constraints on spending as GAAP fund balance, typically represents simply the total amount accumulated from prior years at a point in time. The calculation of GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance sometimes is complicated by the use of sub -funds within the general fund. In such cases, GAAP fund balance includes amounts from all of the subfunds, whereas budgetary fund balance typically does not. Often the timing of the recognition of revenues and expenditures is different for purposes of GAAP financial reporting and budgeting. For example, encumbrances arising from purchase orders often are recognized as expenditures for budgetary purposes, but never for the preparation of GAAP financial statements. The effect of these and other differences on the amounts reported as GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance in the general fund should be clarified, understood, and documented. It is essential that governments maintain adequate levels of fund balance to mitigate current and future risks (e.g., revenue shortfalls and unanticipated expenditures) and to ensure stable tax rates. In most cases, discussions of fund balance will properly focus on a government's general fund. Nonetheless, financial resources available in other funds should also be considered in assessing the adequacy of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund. Recommendation: GFOA recommends that governments establish a formal policy on the level of unrestricted fund balance that should be maintained in the general fund for GAAP and budgetary purposes.' Such a guideline should be set by the appropriate policy body and articulate a framework and process for how the government would increase or decrease the level of unrestricted fund balance over a specific time Packet Pg. 148 2.1.e period.' In particular, governments should provide broad guidance in the policy for how resources will be directed to replenish fund balance should the balance fall below the level prescribed. Appropriate Level. The adequacy of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund should take into account each government's own unique circumstances. For example, governments that may be vulnerable to natural disasters, more dependent on a volatile revenue source, or potentially subject to cuts in state aid and/or federal grants may need to maintain a higher level in the unrestricted fund balance. Articulating these risks in a fund balance policy makes it easier to explain to stakeholders the rationale for a seemingly higher than normal level of fund balance that protects taxpayers and employees from unexpected changes in financial condition. Nevertheless, GFOA recommends, at a minimum, that general-purpose governments, regardless of size, maintain unrestricted budgetary fund balance in their general fund of no less than two months of regular general fund operating revenues or regular general fund operating expenditures.' The choice of revenues or expenditures as a basis of comparison may be dictated by what is more predictable in a government's particular circumstances.' Furthermore, a government's particular situation often may require a level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund significantly in excess of this recommended minimum level. In any case, such measures should be applied within the context of long-term forecasting, thereby avoiding the risk of placing too much emphasis upon the level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund at any one time. In establishing a policy governing the level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund, a government should consider a variety of factors, including: 1. The predictability of its revenues and the volatility of its expenditures (i.e., higher levels of unrestricted fund balance may be needed if significant revenue sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are highly volatile); 2. Its perceived exposure to significant one-time outlays (e.g., disasters, immediate capital needs, state budget cuts); 3. The potential drain upon general fund resources from other funds, as well as, the availability of resources in other funds; 4. The potential impact on the entity's bond ratings and the corresponding increased cost of borrowed funds; 5. Commitments and assignments (i.e., governments may wish to maintain higher levels of unrestricted fund balance to compensate for any portion of unrestricted fund balance already committed or assigned by the government for a specific purpose). Governments may deem it appropriate to exclude from consideration resources that have been committed or assigned to some other purpose and focus on unassigned fund balance, rather than on unrestricted fund balance. Use and Replenishment. The fund balance policy should define conditions warranting its use, and if a fund balance falls below the government's policy level, a solid plan to replenish it. In that context, the fund balance policy should: 1. Define the time period within which and contingencies for which fund balances will be used; 2. Describe how the government's expenditure and/or revenue levels will be adjusted to match any new economic realities that are behind the use of fund balance as a financing bridge; 3. Describe the time period over which the components of fund balance will be replenished and the means by which they will be replenished. Generally, governments should seek to replenish their fund balances within one to three years of use. Specifically, factors influencing the replenishment time horizon include: 1. The budgetary reasons behind the fund balance targets; 2. Recovering from an extreme event; 3. Political continuity; 4. Financial planning time horizons; Packet Pg. 149 2.1.e 5. Long-term forecasts and economic conditions; 6. External financing expectations. Revenue sources that would typically be looked to for replenishment of a fund balance include nonrecurring revenues, budget surpluses, and excess resources in other funds (if legally permissible and there is a defensible rationale). Year-end surpluses are an appropriate source for replenishing fund balance. Unrestricted Fund Balance Above Formal Policy Requirement. In some cases, governments can find themselves in a position with an amount of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund over their formal policy reserve requirement even after taking into account potential financial risks in the foreseeable future. Amounts over the formal policy may reflect a structural trend, in which case governments should consider a policy as to how this would be addressed. Additionally, an education or communication strategy, or at a minimum, explanation of large changes in fund balance is encouraged. In all cases, use of those funds should be prohibited as a funding source for ongoing recurring expenditures. Committee: Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting Governmental Budgeting and Fiscal Policy Notes: 1. For the sake of clarity, this recommended practice uses the terms GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance to distinguish these two different uses of the same term. 2. These categories are set forth in Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. 3. Sometimes restricted fund balance includes resources available to finance items that typically would require the use of unrestricted fund balance (e.g., a contingency reserve). In that case, such amounts should be included as part of unrestricted fund balance for purposes of analysis. 4. See Recommended Practice 4.1 of the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting governments on the need to "maintain a prudent level of financial resources to protect against reducing service levels or raising taxes and fees because of temporary revenue shortfalls or unpredicted one-time expenditures" (Recommended Practice 4.1). 5. In practice, a level of unrestricted fund balance significantly lower than the recommended minimum may be appropriate for states and America's largest governments (e.g., cities, counties, and school districts) because they often are in a better position to predict contingencies (for the same reason that an insurance company can more readily predict the number of accidents for a pool of 500,000 drivers than for a pool of fifty), and because their revenues and expenditures often are more diversified and thus potentially less subject to volatility. 6. In either case, unusual items that would distort trends (e.g., one-time revenues and expenditures) should be excluded, whereas recurring transfers should be included. Once the decision has been made to compare unrestricted fund balance to either revenues and/or expenditures, that decision should be followed consistently from period to period. Packet Pg. 150 2.1.f W. WASHINGTON MID -SIZED FINANCIAL POLICY SUMMARY RISK FUND RESERVE TARGET BALANCE CONTINGENCY CITY POLICY RANGE POLICY TARGET RANGE RESERVE POLICY TARGET RANGE AUBURN N N/A Y 8-12% NOTE #2 NOTE #2 N/A BOTHELL N N/A Y 15% of operating expenditures N/A N/A BREMERTON Y NOTE #1 minimum of 8.5% of operating Y NOTE #3 expenditures (NOTE #6) DES MOINES N N/A y NOTE #4 NOTE #5 NOTE #5 KENT N N/A Y cap of 18% of general fund y 10% of total city revenues fiscal year budget KIRKLAND N N/A N If uncommitted ending fund Y 80%of statutory balance dollars are available, cap of $0.375 per policy calls for distributing 50% $1000 of assessed of fund balance to the various valuaton reserve funds ISSAQUAH N N/A Y cap of 20% of general fund Y no cap defined in expenditures policy LYNNWOOD N N/A Y NOTE#7 N N/A MARYSVILLE N N/A Y 10% of general fund revenue N NOTE #8 MILL CREEK N N/A Y at least 15% of total general N NOTE #10 fund budgeted revenue (NOTE #9) MUKILTEO N N/A Y NOTE#11 Y Minimum of $1m PUYALLUP N N/A Y 8 - 15% of operating revenues N NOTE #12 REDMOND N N/A Y 12.% of operating revenues N NOTE #13 RENTON N N/A Y 12%of general fund operating N N/A expenditures SHORELINE N N/A Y 10% of economical ly-sensitive Y "Budget revenues (NOTE #14) Contingency" reserve of $805k NOTE 1: Bremerton is self -insured, and risk management pool varies each year based on claims activity. There is no specific funding target range. NOTE 2: Auburn also maintains a "cumulative reserve fund" with a range of 5-10% of general governmental operating expenditures. Other proprietary funds target balances of 10-20%of budgeted operating, maintenance and capital expenditures NOTE 3: Target is $0.375/$1000 of assessed valuation of property within the city. NOTE 4: Target is mimimum of 16.67%of recurring operating expenditures NOTE5: Has "stabilization reserve", which is 5%of general fund revenues NOTE 6: 2018 actual ending fund balance was 14.2%of operating expenditures NOTE 7: 19.5% of general fund operating expenses are allocated to two reserve funds: revenue stabilization fund and unencumbered (unassiged) fund balance. NOTE 8: endingfund balance may be held as reserve of reappropriated to a capital reserve, long term obligaton or debt service fund. NOTE 9: excluding beginning fund balance NOTE 10: General fund surpluses will be used to fund onttime operations,capital expenditures or dedicated to the CIP NOTE 11: General fund operating reserve is established as a "cash flow reserve," equal to two months (or 16.6%) of budgeted operating expenditures NOTE 12: Inclusion of all reserves brings total to 18.7%of general fund revneues NOTE 13: General fund reserve is also used to cover contingencies such as natural disasters NOTE 14: Economically sensitive revenues are "volatile" revenues such as taxes from sales tax, gambling tax, state -shared revenues, recreation fees, etc. Shoreline also maintains a $3m General Fund Operating Reserve for cash flow purposes Packet Pg. 151 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy .FPC. t g9" ➢During the last recession, the City lost over $13.3 In revenues ➢We laid -off 21 employees ➢Impacts to citizens included the elimination of: 1) The Block Watch Program million m 2) The Police Department's Vacation House Check Program 3) We eliminated the Crime Prevention Unit 4) We had less Police Officers to keep our City safe 5) City Hall Closed one day a week 6) We also stopped our Street Preservation Program 7) Staff had to do more with less resources ➢Tonight we are going to discuss a plan that has a goal to limit future impacts to citizens and staff Packet Pg. 152 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy . /1C IS9V ➢ Quick overview of current policy ➢ Overview of factors considered for draft Fund Balance / Reserve Policy ➢ Introduce draft amendments to the City's Fund Balance / Reserve Policy ➢ Council Feedback & Q & A after presentation Packet Pg. 153 Fund Balance / Reserve ./1C IS9V ➢ Policy Calls For a total of 18% 2.1.g Policy� Current Policy y m 1) Contingency Reserve Fund — Target 8 — 16% o 2) Risk Management — Target 2% d IL a) ➢ Use of Contingency reserves limited to solving imbalances in the General FundCO ➢ Use of Risk Management reserves limited to = mitigation of legal matters or natural disasters T -- I Packet Pg. 154 `4e. ]S9V 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level z GASB 54 ➢The first factor incorporates the requirements of the m Governmental Accounting Standards Board or GASBymm. ➢For those unfamiliar with GASB, GASB is the body that establishes Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or (GAAP), the accounting rules we have to follow ➢GASB issued Statement 54 requiring Fund Balance Classifications ➢We implemented this rule in 2014 and now updating the policy to include GASB Statement 54 requirement 14 Packet Pg. 155 ➢ RCW 35A.33.145 Fund Creation. 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level RCW 35A.33.145 establishes authority for Contingency ➢ This RCW allows us to create a Contingency Reserve Fund to: ➢ Meet any municipal expense which could not have been foreseen or for emergencies ➢ The RCW limits the size of the reserve to thirty-seven and one-half cents per thousand dollars of assessed property valuation or $3,830,000 Packet Pg. 156 ./1C I s9v 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level GFOA Best Practice Guideline ➢ GFOA recommends a fund balance reserve of no less m then two months of regular general fund operating revenue or operating expenditures ➢ The choice of revenues or expenditures as a basis of comparison may be dictated by what is more predictable Packet Pg. 157 `'? C . iQ 9M 0 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level 0� GFOA Best Practice Guideline 0' (continued) 1. The predictability / volatility of revenues and 3 expenses 0 ➢ GFOA states higher levels may be needed if revenues or expenses are unpredictable or volatile 2. Perceived exposure to significant one-time outlays, e.g., disasters, state budget cuts, or immediate capital needs 3. The potential drain upon the general fund from other funds 4. The potential impact on the entity's bond rating __ 7 Packet Pg. 158 ./1C l s9v 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level GFOA Best Practice Guideline ➢ Past experiences (continued) C — During last recession 9 LL 1. Lost Revenues - EMS Levy, Sales Tax & Development Related Revenues 2. Impacts to City Services as 21 positions were laid off during the last recession & staff furloughs I Stopped Street preservation Packet Pg. 159 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level ,,,� l �y� CFOA Best Practice Guideline (continued) m ➢ Past experiences — Lost revenues during last recession $4,250,000 $4,000,000 $ 3, 75 0,000 $3,500,000 $3,250,000 $3,000,000 $2,750,000 $2,500,000 Lost EMS Revenue Totals $4,494,460 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2009 Voted Levy Amount Actual Levy Packet Pg. 160 ./1C I s9m 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level GFOA Best Practice Guideline (continued) m ➢ Past experiences — Lost revenues during last recession $6,000,000 $ 5, 75 0,000 $5,500,000 $ 5, 25 0,000 $5,000,000 $4,750,000 $4,500,000 $4,250,000 $4,000,000 Lost Sales Tax Revenue Totals $4,383,724 z 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2007 Sales Tax Revenuf Actual Revenuf in Packet Pg. 161 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level w s i g y GFOA Best Practice Guideline (continued) )'w'- Past experiences — Lost revenues during last recession $2,000,000 T Lost Development Related Revenue Totals $4,052,843 $1, 750,000 $1, 500,000 $1, 25 0,000 $1, 000,000 $750,000 $500,000 Air 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2008 Developmen Revenues Actual Revenue 11 Packet Pg. 162 . /1C I s9v 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level GFOA Best Practice Guideline (continued) Past experiences — Lost revenues during last recession Cumulative Revenues Lost due to Recession $14,000,000 $13,000,000 $12,000,000 $11,000,000 $10,000,000 $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 19 Packet Pg. 163 ./1C I s9m 30% 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Factors to Consider When Setting Your Fund Balance Level Neighboring Cities Reserve Policies Approximate Reserve Policies in Neighboring CitiesLU 28% 20% 20% 21% 22% 22% 20% - 19% 17% 15% 15% 12% 12% 12% 10% 10% 8% - 0% Packet Pg. 164 ./,C 130 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft PolicvOverview'. Article I m To provide for the continuity of City government by', 0 planningahead for uncertainties or unforeseen expenditures ➢ Article II Criteria that should be considered 1. Volatility 2. Fund size 3. Purpose of reserve 4. Bond Ratings 14 Packet Pg. 165 `ne. to 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft Policy Overview continued ➢ Article III General Fund Operating Reserve m ➢ Policy would set reserve to equal 16% of General 0 Fund Adopted Operating Expenditure Budget d ➢ Finance to deliver annual report to CouncilEL ➢ Limitations of Fund Use ➢ Mayor can declare a fiscal emergency based upon: 1. Natural catastrophe 2. Threat to health or public safety, or 3. Significant decline in General Fund revenues ➢ Fiscal emergency must be approved by a sim leg Y pp p majority vote of the Council a Packet Pg. 166 ./1C l s9v 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft Policy Overview continued m ➢ Primary differences between the two reserves 1. Contingency Reserve limited by RCW 2. The two reserves cannot surpass 20% of the General ➢ Article IV Contingency Reserve Fund Fund Adopted Operating Expenditure Budget 3. If the General Fund Operating Reserve equals 16%, then the Contingency Reserve cannot exceed 4% 4. General Fund Operating Reserve should be exhausted prior to utilizing the Contingency Reserve ➢ Fiscal emergency must be approved by a simple majority vote of the Council ig Packet Pg. 167 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft Policv Overview continued M ➢ Replenishment of the Reserve Funds 1. 0 — 10%use of funds be replenished over 3 years 2. 11 — 25%use of funds be replenished over 5 years 3. 26 — 50%use of funds be replenished over 7 years 17 Packet Pg. 168 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy `'? C . 1Q 9M 0 )'w- Article V -Reporting Draft Policy Overview continued ➢ During month of August, Council to receive comprehensive fund balance reserve report ➢ Article VI —Five Year Review ➢ Article VII —Any deviations from policy requires Council approval ➢ Article VIII -Definitions m 12 Packet Pg. 169 2.1.g Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Review / Recommendations ./1C IS9V ➢ Current Policy Calls For a total of 18% 9 ➢ The amended policy calls for a total of 20% ➢ Finance Committee recommends closing the d a Risk Management Fund into the General Fund ➢ Council Feedback & Q & A m LL 1A Packet Pg. 170 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page I of 4 �MRSC Local Government Success Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' April 26, 2017 by Mike Bailey Category: Finance Advisor, Finance Policies I was preparing a presentation on financial management recently and was reminded of a concept that has been reinforced to me many times over the years. For purposes of this blog post, I'll call it the 'It Depends' concept. I first gave some thought to this idea some time ago when I was involved in a discussion on what the right level of fund balance should be for local governments. This discussion occurred in the Committee on Budgeting and Financial Management for the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). The most common question GFOA regularly got from its 19,000 members was "what is the right level of fund balance for local government?" and the answer, in its entirety, was "it depends." That was all — an "it depends" followed by a "thank you for asking!" Fortunately, we soon realized that while "it depends" was the right answer, it was also totally unsatisfying. Real GFOA members, who worked with real councils / boards seeking to adopt meaningful financial policies, wanted more. So the budget committee went on to provide some additional guidance around the "it depends" answer. The current GFOA best practice has since evolved into different aspects on the fund balance question. There are published best practice documents on Fund Balance in the General Fund and Working Capital in Enterprise Funds. Essentially, the general guidance is to maintain at least two months of fund balance or working capital — but, of course, it depends. Different Strokes for Different Folks So, why do I think that "it depends" is the right answer? As pointed out in the GFOA's best practice documents on the topic, each government's context will be different. Our economies are different, our sources of revenues are different, our habits and practices are different. These differences are what makes local government an interesting and challenging place to work. Packet Pg. 171 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 2 of 4 No one set of answers will always (or ever) apply to the challenges and opportunities that we are confronted with. But these differences also need to be taken into account when we determine the best policies for our specific jurisdiction. Have a Conversation I also like this answer because it gets at the heart of what makes for the best policy guidance: Before a meaningful policy can be developed, a good conversation needs to occur. This conversation should be informed by such things as the best practice guidance mentioned above, your own past experiences, a review of the issues and influences that may come into play, and other elements. A discussion of this nature allows participants to interact with data, advice, experience, their own ideas, and the ideas of others. Thoughtful discussion allows best policy guidance to emerge, to be documented, and then, to be adopted by the legislative body. This is a great way to start a budget process. Take a look at the policies you've adopted (or maybe should still adopt) and consider if these continue to provide the best 'guardrails' to guide your local government into the future. Have the conversation! Beyond Fund Balance The "it depends" concept extends beyond fund balance. There are many, many areas where it is important to provide policy guidance for an organization to work effectively together and make progress over time. There is a tension inherent in these discussions that should be recognized as part of the discussion. Too much policy control will limit the flexibility of the staff to function as efficiently as possible. Too little control may enable administrative action that is outside the bounds of what the legislative (policy) body would prefer. Finding that happy medium between efficiency and preferred behavior will only occur through a thoughtful discussion. Potential Discussions Examples of potential discussions resulting in good policy guidance include: Purchasing limits —At what points do procurement of goods and services require council / board approval? Fees and charges —Who has what authority for setting fees in your organization? What are the goals in fee setting: cost recovery, equity, accessibility? Grants —Who can apply for grants? Are there any priorities for which grants to pursue? Where is responsibility for grant compliance? Investments —Who is authorized to invest public funds? What are the goals of the program? What investments are permissible? Balanced budgets —Is cash forward, or fund balance, available as a revenue to balance budgets? Capital expenditures —What is the capitalization threshold? What qualifies for a capital project in the budget: cost and life of the resulting asset? In each of these examples it can be very helpful to know the right answer before confronted with the challenge. The 'right' answer will be different from one local government to another. Therefore some discussion will be necessary to arrive at the best answer for your entity. Packet Pg. 172 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 3 of 4 Fortunately, in the public sector we can benefit from each other's experiences. The MRSC website has many good examples of financial policies adopted by various local governments (and is a great place to start). However, at the end of the day, the best financial policies for your jurisdiction can only be determined after a good conversation. That is because the answer to any of these questions is - "It depends." Not sure what the right financial policies are for your jurisdiction? MRSC has just launched a new series of online resources to help you develop policies and procedures that are tailored to your jurisdiction's needs. We've focused on five key areas in particular: • Asset management • Cost allocation • Debt • Fund balance/reserves • Investments For each area, we provide key questions to consider as well as links to best practices and examples from local jurisdictions in Washington. We can't give you the right answer — like Mike says, "it depends" — but we can help you ask the right questions to get there! About Mike Bailey Mike Bailey writes for MRSC as a Finance Advisor. Mike Bailey is currently the Finance Director for the city of Redmond. Previously he worked as Administrator of Finance and Information Services for the city of Renton and as the Director of Finance for the city of Lynnwood. Mr. Bailey also served as president of the Washington Finance Officers Association and is the Vice Chair of the GFOA Budget Committee. An experienced CPA and GFOA budget reviewer, Mr. Bailey co-founded the annual Budget and Fiscal Management Workshops held each summer. Mr. Bailey conducts numerous workshops and has authored various articles on local government finance, including Effective Budgeting in Washington State Cities published by the Association of Washington Cities. The views expressed in Advisor columns represent the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those ofMRSC. VIEW ALL POSTS BY MIKE BAILEY / Leave a Comment - Comments Packet Pg. 173 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 4 of 4 0 comments on Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Blog post currently doesn't have any comments. © 2015 MRSC of Washington. All rights reserved. Privacy & Terms. Packet Pg. 174 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 2.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Edmonds Public Facilities District Financial Report Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History In 2001, the Edmonds City Council establish the Edmonds Public Facilities District (EPFD) and in 2002, the City of Edmonds (City) signed an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for Development of the Edmonds Centre for the Arts (ECA) with the Snohomish County Public Facilities District with the purpose of exploring, with City the development of the ECA. Subsequently, the City issued the 2002 Performing Arts Center LTGO Bonds to purchase the current location of the ECA and to pay for site renovations. In 2008, the City and the EPFD entered into an ILA that includes a Contingent Loan Agreement (CLA) for EPFD issued a bonds. The bonds were issued to pay for building improvements. The CLA is a guarantee from the City to bondholders, that states that the City will loan the EPFD funds necessary to make required debt service payments should the EPFD not have sufficient funds to make the payment. In 2018, the City and the EPFD amended the CLA as part of refinancing the 2008 bonds. The amended CLA includes a provision requiring the EPFD to provide the City Council Finance Committee with a quarterly report summarizing financial activity and each November the report is to summarize financial expectations for the following year and within nine months after the end of each year, the report is to include a complete set of financial statements. Staff Recommendation Review the EFPD's quarterly reports for the 2018 year-end and the 2019 first quarter. Narrative Attachments: Edmonds PFD YE 2018 Edmonds PFD Q1 MARCH 2O19 Packet Pg. 175 2.2.a Operating Revenues: Operating Expenses: Operating Income (Loss) Non -Operating Income (Loss) TOTAL NET INCOME (LOSS) BEGINNING NET POSITION END OF Period NET POSITION Note that Twelve Months = 100% of the year Difference due to rounding Edmonds Public Facilities District Statement of Revenue, Expenses and Changes in Net Position For the Twelve Month Period Ended December 31, 2018 % of 12/31/2018 12/31/2017 Difference Budget2018 Budget2018 $ 2,639,431 $ 2,544,419 $ 95,012 $ 2,664,500 99.06% $ 2,636,071 $ 2,726,223 $ (90,152) $ 2,664,500 98.93% $ 3,360 $ (181,804) $ 185,164 U $ - $ 379,965 $ (146,802) $ 526,767 $ (25,406) $ 383,325 $ (328,606) $ 711,931 V $ (25,406) $ 2,969,130 $ 3,297,736 $ 3,352,455 $ 2,969,130 O !Z d a' v c to c IL a+ �.: �L N G CID d :r M LL C1 7 d N C O E LU 00 O N LU LL a c O E LU c m E U �a r Q Packet Pg. 176 2.2.a Edmonds Public Facilities District Statement of Revenue, Expenses and Changes in Net Position For the Twelve Month Period Ended December 31, 2018 % of 12/31/2018 12/31/2017 Difference Budget2018 Budget2018 Operating Revenues: Ticket Sales and Fees 659,650 735,515 (75,865) 775,000 85.12% Rentals 609,214 599,137 10,077 600,000 101.54% Education and Outreach 44,874 41,547 3,327 62,000 Concessions 137,065 139,166 (2,101) 147,500 92.93% Contributions 1,124,503 951,099 173,404 1,015,000 110.79% Advertising 14,200 44,200 (30,000) 65,000 Historic Facility Preservation Fee 49,925 33,755 16,170 - Total Operating Revenue 2,639,431 2,544,419 95,012 2,664,500 99.06% Operating Expenses: Artist Presentations and Theatre 527,224 561,670 34,446 557,000 Rentals 33,111 45,414 12,303 23,000 143.96% Advertising and Marketing 168,055 231,216 63,161 215,000 78.17% Education and Outreach 69,469 72,941 3,472 62,000 112.05% Development 98,789 99,358 569 92,000 107.38% Payroll, Taxes and Employee Benefits 1,308,002 1,267,177 (40,825) 1,290,000 101.40% Facilities Maintenance and Utilities 167,706 164,787 (2,919) 165,000 101.64% Contracted Services 14,273 41,796 27,523 12,500 114.18% Supplies and Other Operating Expenses 249,442 241,864 (7,578) 248,000 100.58% Total Operating Expenses 2,636,071 2,726,223 90,152 2,664,500 98.93% Operating Income (Loss) Non -operating Revenue and (Expenses): Intergovernmental Revenue* Grant Revenue Interest Expense** Interest Earned Loss/Gain on Stock Realized Depreciation*** Non -Operating Income (Loss) TOTAL NET INCOME (LOSS) BEGINNING NET POSITION END OF Period NET POSITION Note that Twelve Months = 100% of the year Difference due to rounding * Adjustment made FY18 for FYI $28,939 (FY 2015)/additional rev from sales taA ** Includes interest expense plus debt issuance cost for 2008 bond sale '"Difference prior year adjustment in Jan 2017 for 2016 of 48,500 Depreciation per Auditor., 3,360 (181,804) 185,164 787,945 671,982 115,963 750,000 105.06% 493,309 25,110 468,199 - - (308,667) (214,971) (93,696) (188,488) 163.76% 7,201 2,752 4,449 1,200 600.08% (422) 575 (997) - - (599,401) (632,250) 32,849 (588,118) 101.92% 379,965 (146,802) 526,767 (25,406) 383,325 (328,606) 711,931 (25,406) 2,969,130 3,297,736 3,352,455 2,969,130 O Q d a' 0 U C O C IL �L 0 N d :r R ILL a N C O E LU 00 0 N LU LL a C O E LU C d E t U O r Q Packet Pg. 177 2.2.a Edmonds Public Facilities District P&L Net Position Before/After Depreciation 1,00,000 80Q o00 6o0FDOo 400,0 Z00, 0 0 21 -2O0r0 -$40O,000 Net Position Before Depreciation Budget 2019 Net Pori on After Depreciation Packet Pg. 178 2.2.b Operating Revenues: Operating Expenses: Operating Income (Loss) Non -Operating Income (Loss) TOTAL NET INCOME (LOSS) BEGINNING NET POSITION END OF Period NET POSITION Note that Three Month(s) = 25% of the year Difference due to rounding Edmonds Public Facilities District Statement of Revenue, Expenses and Changes in Net Position For the Three Month Period Ended March 31, 2019 of 1/31/2019 1/31/2018 Difference Budget2019 Budget2019 $ 764,919 $ 735,721 $ 29,198 $ 2,762,000 27.69% $ 739,052 $ 696,485 $ (42,567) $ 2,762,000 26.76% $ 25,867 $ 39,236 $ (13,369) $ - - $ (41,562) $ (18,738) $ (22,824) $ 216,000 $ (15,695) $ 20,498 $ (36,193) $ 216,000 $ 3,349,204 $ 2,969,130 $ 3,333,509 $ 2,989,629 �a v c Id c LL v •L �-r 0 N m .v �a LL _v a c 0 E LLI C 2 d u r 0 N <.i Q i 0 LL d N C O E LLI r C d E t v r r Q Packet Pg. 179 2.2.b Operating Revenues: Ticket Sales and Fees Rentals Education and Outreach Concessions Contributions Advertising Historic Facility Preservation Fee Total Operating Revenue Operating Expenses: Artist Presentations and Theatre Rentals Advertising and Marketing Education and Outreach Development Payroll, Taxes and Employee Benefits Facilities Maintenance and Utilities Contracted Services LEVL Special Projects Supplies and Other Operating Expenses Total Operating Expenses Operating Income (Loss) Non -operating Revenue and (Expenses): Intergovernmental Revenue* Grant Revenue Interest Expense Interest Earned Loss/Gain on Stock Realized Depreciation** Non -Operating Income (Loss) TOTAL NET INCOME (LOSS) f3��Il�f1�[d►[�lZ��jfll[dID Edmonds Public Facilities District Statement of Revenue, Expenses and Changes in Net Position For the Three Month Period Ended March 31, 2019 % of 3/31/2019 3/31/2018 Difference Budget2019 Budget2019 $ 218,245 $ 198,207 $ 20,038 $ 720,000 30.31% 197,166 209,640 (12,474) 625,000 31.55% 14,447 16,545 (2,098) 50,000 28.89% 46,701 51,369 (4,668) 165,000 28.30% 272,408 245,134 27,274 1,096,000 24.85% 7,150 5,500 1,650 51,000 14.02% 8,801 9,326 (525) 55,000 16.00% $ 764,919 $ 735,721 $ 29,198 $ 2,762,000 27.69% $ 175,570 $ 150,871 (24,699) $ 536,000 32.76% 8,641 11,150 2,509 44,000 19.64% 38,833 42,425 3,592 200,000 19.42% 32,636 28,490 (4,146) 65,000 50.21% 1,647 3,405 1,758 95,000 1.73% 356,606 354,311 (2,295) 1,425,000 25.02% 49,370 48,212 (1,158) 160,000 30.86% - 5,140 5,140 4,000 0.00% 20,117 - (20,117) - 55,633 52,481 (3,152) 233,000 23.88% $ 739,052 $ 696,485 $ (42,567) $ 2,762,000 26.76% $ 25,867 $ 39,236 $ (13,369) $ $ 159,897 $ 149,352 $ 10,545 $ 813,000 19.67% - 30,000 (30,000) 200,000 0.00% (45,609) (50,873) 5,264 (164,000) 27.81% 839 157 682 4,000 20.97% 259 (417) 676 1,000 25.91% (156,947) (146,957) (9,990) (638,000) 24.60% $ (41,562) $ (18,738) $ (22,824) $ 216,000 $ (15,695) $ 20,498 $ (36,193) $ 216,000 $ 3,349,204 $ 2,969,130 END OF Period NET POSITION $ 3,333,509 $ 2,989,629 Note that Three Month(s) = 25% of the year Difference due to rounding Packet Pg. 180 2.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Civic Field Debt Service Options Discussion Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History In November 2018, Council adopted both the CIP and CFP that identified Civic as a project, with a goal to begin construction in 2020. During the June 4, 2019 Council meeting, staff presented a series of Civic Park Financing options. Staff Recommendation Discuss financing options for Civic development. Narrative The discussion will cover debt service options for financing construction of Civic Park. Attachment includes three funding level options for financing construction: $2.5 million, $3.0 million and $3.5 million bonds. Attachments: Civic Field Park Debt Service Options - June 5, 2019 Packet Pg. 181 2.3.a Civic Field Park Bond Scenarios for June 2019Council Finance Committee Discussion LTGO (Nonvoted) Bonds - Current Market Plus Approx. 0.25% $2.5 Million Proceeds Dec. 1 Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 2020 $ 75,000 5.000% $ 88,950 $ 163,950 2021 80,000 5.000% 85,200 165,200 2022 85,000 5.000% 81,200 166,200 2023 90,000 5.000% 76,950 166,950 2024 95,000 5.000% 72,450 167,450 2025 100,000 5.000% 67,700 167,700 2026 105,000 5.000% 62,700 167,700 2027 110,000 5.000% 57,450 167,450 2028 115,000 5.000% 51,950 166,950 2029 120,000 3.000% 46,200 166,200 2030 125,000 3.000% 42,600 167,600 2031 130,000 3.000% 38,850 168,850 2032 130,000 3.000% 34,950 164,950 2033 135,000 3.000% 31,050 166,050 2034 140,000 3.000% 27,000 167,000 2035 145,000 3.000% 22,800 167,800 2036 150,000 3.000% 18,450 168,450 2037 150,000 3.000% 13,950 163,950 2038 155,000 3.000% 9,450 164,450 2039 160,000 3.000% 4,800 164,800 $ 2, 395, 000 $ 934, 650 $ 3,329,650 $3.0 Million Proceeds Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service $ 95,000 5.000% $ 106,300 $ 201,300 100,000 5.000% 101,550 201,550 100,000 5.000% 96,550 196,550 105,000 5.000% 91,550 196,550 115,000 5.000% 86,300 201,300 120,000 5.000% 80,550 200,550 125,000 5.000% 74,550 199,550 130,000 5.000% 68,300 198,300 135,000 5.000% 61,800 196,800 145,000 3.000% 55,050 200,050 150,000 3.000% 50,700 200,700 155,000 3.000% 46,200 201,200 155,000 3.000% 41,550 196,550 160,000 3.000% 36,900 196,900 165,000 3.000% 32,100 197,100 170,000 3.000% 27,150 197,150 175,000 3.000% 22,050 197,050 180,000 3.000% 16,800 196,800 185,000 3.000% 11,400 196,400 195,000 3.000% 5,850 200,850 $ 2, 860, 000 $1,113, 200 $ 3,973,200 $3.5 Million Proceeds Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service $ 110,000 5.000% $ 123,650 $ 233,650 115,000 5.000% 118,150 233,150 120,000 5.000% 112,400 232,400 125,000 5.000% 106,400 231,400 130,000 5.000% 100,150 230,150 140,000 5.000% 93,650 233,650 145,000 5.000% 86,650 231,650 150,000 5.000% 79,400 229,400 160,000 5.000% 71,900 231,900 165,000 3.000% 63,900 228,900 170,000 3.000% 58,950 228,950 175,000 3.000% 53,850 228,850 180,000 3.000% 48,600 228,600 190,000 3.000% 43,200 233,200 195,000 3.000% 37,500 232,500 200,000 3.000% 31,650 231,650 205,000 3.000% 25,650 230,650 210,000 3.000% 19,500 229,500 220,000 3.000% 13,200 233,200 220,000 3.000% 6,600 226,600 $3,325,000 $1,294,950 $ 4,619,950 Packet Pg. 182 2.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Washington State Auditor's Office Financial Intelligence Tool Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead} Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History The Washington State Auditor's Office has been working on developing a web site for citizens to view the financial performance of all cities in the State. Staff Recommendation Learn how to navigate the Financial Intelligence Tool to see how the City of Edmonds financial performance compares to other cities. Narrative Staff will share a brief overview of the Washington State Auditor's Office new Financial Intelligence Tool. Packet Pg. 183 2.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Utility Rate Increase & future adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History None. Staff Recommendation Preparation of a Utility Rate Ordinance for approval in a future council meeting. Narrative The City of Edmonds operates a combined utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions. The City received the draft combined utility rate study from its consultant, the FCS Group. The findings show increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates. This funding will help address rising costs including but not limited to: inflation and the rising maintenance and operations costs, wholesale cost increases for potable water from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District, the replacement of aging and failing water/sewer/storm infrastructure as part of the annual replacement projects and upcoming larger capital projects. The rate increases recommended and proposed by staff will make it so that the City will only need to acquire bonds for some of the larger upcoming capital projects. The cost for annual maintenance and replacement projects will be rate funded, thereby resulting in considerable future savings to the City. Attachments: Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v2 - Infl AWWD Inc Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v2 Edmonds DRAFT Stormwater Rate Model v2 Packet Pg. 184 2.5.a City of Edmonds Water Rate & GFC Model ,= Summary Total Capital Projects $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Grants and Developer Contributions $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ - PWTF Loan Proceeds Revenue Bond Proceeds - - Use of Capital Fund Balance 4,697,000 2,553,456 2,941,994 3,727,356 3,895,916 4,051,752 4,007,305 4,167,597 4,920,017 3,974,671 4,133,658 Direct Rate Funding Total Funding Sources $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Revenues Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates Non -Rate Revenues Total Revenues Expenses Cash O&M Expenses [1] Debt Service System Reinvestment Rate Funded CIP Total Expenses Annual Rate Adjustment Rate Increases Dictated by., Rate Revenues After Rate Increase Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase Coverage After Rate Increases $ 8,674,361 $ 8,725,504 $ 8,776,860 $ 8,828,564 $ 8,880,483 $ 8,932,939 $ 8,985,426 $ 9,038,480 $ 9,091,726 $ 9,145,167 $ 9,199,177 1,538,298 1,371,765 939,874 945,409 951,013 956,689 962,190 967,755 973,261 979,201 985,089 $10,212,658 $ 10,097,269 $ 9,716,734 $ 9,773,973 $ 9,831,496 $ 9,889,628 $ 9,947,616 $ 10,006,234 $ 10,064,987 $ 10,124,368 $ 10,184,267 $ 6,198,021 $ 6,252,103 $ 6,171,248 $ 6,343,382 $ 6,523,277 $ 6,711,684 $ 6,908,836 $ 7,115,793 $ 7,332,907 $ 7,561,056 $ 7,801,241 1,256, 540 1,258,950 1,254,358 1,254,742 1,275,378 1,270,093 1,253,081 1,243,796 1,253,179 1,249,168 1,250,620 2,400,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,800,000 2,950,000 3,100,000 3,250,000 3,400,000 3,500,000 3,650,000 3,800,000 $ 9,854,561 $ 10,011,053 $ 10,025,605 $ 10,398,124 $ 10,748,656 $ 11,081,777 $ 11,411,916 $ 11,759,589 $ 12,086,087 $ 12,460,224 $ 12,851,861 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Analysis $ 8,674,361 $ 8,987,269 $ 9,311,371 $ 9,647,210 $ 9,995,062 $ 10,355,725 $ 10,729,069 $ 11,116,190 $ 11,517,127 $ 11,932,368 $ 12,338,595 $ 358,098 $ 301,626 $ 145,308 $ 71,461 $ 29,909 $ 16,807 $ 17,291 $ 12,097 $ 39,787 $ 32,458 3.72 3.72 3.71 3.85 3.90 4.05 4.15 4.32 4.41 4.55 4.68 )perating Fund $ 1,058,098 $ 845,870 $ 870,175 $ 897,621 $ 926,339 $ 943,146 $ 960,437 $ 972,533 $ 1,012,320 $ 1,044,778 $ 1,044,778 ;apital Fund 3,306,123 4,247,225 4,521,420 4,141,082 3,694,020 3,240,805 2,971,732 2,696,180 1,764,177 1,913,642 2,064,216 )ebt Reserve Fund 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 Total $ 5,564,828 $ 6,293,703 $ 6,592,202 $ 6,239,310 $ 5,820,967 $ 5,384,559 $ 5,132,776 $ 4,869,321 $ 3,977,104 $ 4,159,028 $ 4,309,601 ;ombinedMinimum Target Balance $ 1,869,210 $ 1,889,729 $ 1,907,958 $ 1,928,542 $ 1,950,081 $ 1,972,663 $ 1,996,322 $ 2,021,183 $ Z03ZO52 $ 2,034,414 $ 2,034,487 Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Water Rate Model v - (425) 867-1802 Packet Pg. 185 2.5.b City of Edmonds Water Rate & GFC Model ,= Summary Total Capital Projects $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Grants and Developer Contributions $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ - PWTF Loan Proceeds Revenue Bond Proceeds - - Use of Capital Fund Balance 4,697,000 2,553,456 2,941,994 3,727,356 3,895,916 4,051,752 4,007,305 4,167,597 4,920,017 3,974,671 4,133,658 Direct Rate Funding Total Funding Sources $ 4,697,000 $ 2,553,456 $ 2,941,994 $ 3,727,356 $ 3,895,916 $ 4,051,752 $ 4,007,305 $ 4,167,597 $ 4,920,017 $ 3,974,671 $ 4,133,658 Revenues Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates Non -Rate Revenues Total Revenues Expenses Cash O&M Expenses [1] Debt Service System Reinvestment Rate Funded CIP Total Expenses Annual Rate Adjustment Rate Increases Dictated by., Rate Revenues After Rate Increase Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase Coverage After Rate Increases $ 8,674,361 $ 8,725,504 $ 8,776,860 $ 8,828,564 $ 8,880,483 $ 8,932,939 $ 8,985,426 $ 9,038,480 $ 9,091,726 $ 9,145,167 $ 9,199,177 1,538,298 1,371,765 940,642 946,060 951,995 957,496 963,449 969,424 975,351 980,707 986,834 $10,212,658 $ 10,097,269 $ 9,717,502 $ 9,774,624 $ 9,832,478 $ 9,890,435 $ 9,948,876 $ 10,007,903 $ 10,067,077 $ 10,125,874 $ 10,186,011 $ 6,198,021 $ 6,563,441 $ 6,611,060 $ 6,852,790 $ 7,116,241 $ 7,378,191 $ 7,653,880 $ 7,944,657 $ 8,251,180 $ 8,574,646 $ 8,916,397 1,256, 540 1,258,950 1,254,358 1,254,742 1,275,378 1,270,093 1,253,081 1,243,796 1,253,179 1,249,168 1,250,620 2,400,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,800,000 3,050,000 3,200,000 3,400,000 3,600,000 3,821,799 3,974,671 4,133,658 $ 9,854,561 $ 10,322,390 $ 10,465,417 $ 10,907,532 $ 11,441,620 $ 11,848,284 $ 12,306,960 $ 12,788,453 $ 13,326,158 $ 13,798,485 $ 14,300,675 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Analysis $ 8,674,361 $ 9,161,779 $ 9,676,488 $ 10,220,166 $ 10,794,283 $ 11,292,365 $ 11,813,064 $ 12,358,126 $ 12,928,165 $ 13,524,323 $ 14,041,610 $ 358,098 $ 133,894 $ 16,508 $ 49,550 $ 17,034 $ 46,980 $ 44,588 $ 40,186 $ 780 $ 48,402 3.72 3.60 3.64 3.87 4.03 4.23 4.37 4.60 4.75 4.96 5.09 )perating Fund $ 1,058,098 $ 897,049 $ 913,556 $ 963,106 $ 980,140 $ 1,027,119 $ 1,071,707 $ 1,111,894 $ 1,112,673 $ 1,161,075 $ 1,161,075 ;apital Fund 3,306,123 4,028,315 4,178,223 3,748,722 3,394,584 3,036,877 2,914,745 2,838,338 2,230,266 2,711,394 3,207,591 )ebt Reserve Fund 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 1,200,608 Total $ 5,564,828 $ 6,125,971 $ 6,292,387 $ 5,912,436 $ 5,575,331 $ 5,264,604 $ 5,187,060 $ 5,150,839 $ 4,543,547 $ 5,073,076 $ 5,569,274 ;ombinedMinimum Target Balance $ 1,869,210 $ 1,928,114 $ 1,962,181 $ 1,991,346 $ 2,023,186 $ 2,054,835 $ 2,088,177 $ 2,123,372 $ 2,145,264 $ 2,159,378 $ 2,171,972 r M O C O r Q O 'O M d L 06 d N tB W V C d r.+ M r Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Wa (425) 867-1802 Packet Pg. 186 2.5.c r r: V 'f. City of Edmonds Stormwater Rate & GFC Model Revenue Requirement Analysis Expenses Cash Operating Expenses $ 2,726,795 $ 2,830,315 $ 2,919,099 $ 3,013,050 $ 3,112,595 $ 3,218,202 $ 3,330,380 $ 3,449,693 $ 3,576,752 $ 3,712,232 $ 3,856870 Debt Service 756,109 756,991 755,466 753,654 758,532 756,365 723,044 722,625 596,427 601,012 600:619 System Reinvestment 1,250,000 1,750,000 2,100,000 2,500,000 2,600,000 2,750,000 2,900,000 3,050,000 3,300,000 3,450,000 3,600,000 Rate -Funded CIP - - - - - - - - - - - Additions to Meet Minimum Operating Fund Balance - - - Total $ 4,732,904 $ 5,337,306 $ 5,774,565 $ 6,266,704 $ 6,471,127 $ 6,724,567 $ 6,953,425 $ 7,222,318 $ 7,473,179 $ 7,763,244 $ 8,057,489 Revenues Rate Revenue $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 City Utility Tax Revenue 446,277 447,392 448,511 449,632 450,756 451,883 453,013 454,145 455,281 456,419 457,560 Other Revenue 83,944 84,245 79,470 79,686 79,748 80,120 80,213 80,540 80,658 80,996 81,138 Total $ 4.992.988 $ 5.005.562 $ 5.013.089 $ 5.025.640 $ 5.038.067 $ 5.050.835 $ 5.063.354 $ 5.076.139 $ 5.088.746 $ 5.101.605 $ 5.114,298 Expenses Cash Operating Expenses (Excluding City Taxes) Revenue Bond Debt Service Additional Coverage Required Total Revenues Rate Revenue (Excluding City Taxes) GFC Revenue Other Revenue Interest Earnings Total $ 2,280,519 $ 2,382,922 $ 2,470,588 $ 2,563,418 $ 2,661,839 $ 2,766,318 $ 2,877,368 $ 2,995,547 $ 3,121,471 $ 3,255,813 $ 3,399,310 565,078 564,642 563,675 562,546 566,588 565,416 563,802 563,062 563,248 567,833 567,441 $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 43,240 43,348 43,457 43,565 43,674 43,783 43,893 44,002 44,112 44,223 44,333 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 73,594 Prepared by FCS GROUP (425)867-1802 Edmonds DRAFT Storm Packet Pg. 187 2.5.c r r: V 'f. City of Edmonds Stormwater Rate & GFC Model Revenue Requirement Analysis to 4- 0 - • 020 r 0 Sufficienc Test Drivin the Deficienc Y 9 Y None Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash +, CL Maximum Deficiency From Tests $ (260,084) $ 331,744 $ 761,476 $ 1,241,065 $ 1,433,060 $ 1,673,732 $ 1,890,071 $ 2,146,179 $ 2,384,433 $ 2,661,639 $ 2,943,191 0 less: Net Revenue From Prior Rate Increases (426,085) (894,880) (1,410,562) (1,651,405) (1,902,960) (2,165,685) (2,440,055) (2,726,569) (3,025,745) 0 Net Revenue Deficiency $ (260,084) $ 331,744 $ 335,390 $ 346,185 $ 22,498 $ 22,327 $ (12,890) $ (19,505) $ (55,622) $ (64,930) $ (82,554) 0 Plus: Adjustment for Taxes (33,796) 43,108 98,949 161,268 186,217 217,491 245,602 278,882 309,842 345,863 382,449 i Total Revenue r- :0 0: :0 r3+ 7 05 d Rate Revenue at Existing/Adopted Rates $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,485,109 $ 4,496,321 $ 4,507,562 $ 4,518,831 $ 4,530,128 $ 4,541,454 $ 4,552,807 $ 4,564,189 $ 4,575,600 N Revenues from Prior Rate Increases - - 426,085 894,880 1,410,562 1,651,405 1,902,960 2,165,685 2,440,055 2,726,569 3,025745 Rate Revenue Before Current Year Rate Increase $ 4,462,767 $ 4,473,924 $ 4,911,194 $ 5,391,202 $ 5,918,124 $ 6,170,237 $ 6,433,089 $ 6,707,138 $ 6,992,862 $ 7,290,758 $ 7,601:345 d Required Annual Rate Increase -6.59% 8.38% 8.84% 9.41 % 3.53% 3.89% 3.62% 3.87% 3.64% 3.85% 3.95% V C Number of Months New Rates Will Be In Effect 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 ■ 12 12 41 Info: Percentage Increase to Generate Required Revenue -6.59% 8.38% 8.84% 9.41% 3.53% 3.89% 3.62% 3.87% 3.64% 3.85% 3.95% M IX Policy Induced Rate Increases 0.00% 9.50% 9.50% 9.50% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% ANNUAL RATE INCREASE 0.00% 9.50% 9.50% 9.50% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 3.95% CUMULATIVE RATE INCREASE 0.00% 9.50% 19.90% 31.29% 36.54% 42.01 % 47.69% 53.59% 59.74% 66.13% 72.68% impacts or Rate increases Z1116 zfzllr rizz zilizi ZTZ4r r rZ;Ilzs Rate Revenues After Rate Increase $ 4,462,767 $ 4,898,947 $ 5,377,757 $ 5,903,366 $ 6,154,849 $ 6,417,046 $ 6,690,412 $ 6,975,424 $ 7,272,577 $ 7,582,389 $ 7,901,239 Full Year Rate Revenues After Rate Increase 4,462,767 4,898,947 5,377,757 5,903,366 6,154,849 6,417,046 6,690,412 6,975,424 7,272,577 7,582,389 7,901,239 Additional Taxes Due to Rate Increases City Utility Taxes $ - $ 42,502 $ 89,265 $ 140,704 $ 164,729 $ 189,821 $ 216,028 $ 243,397 $ 271,977 $ 301,820 $ 332,564 Excise Taxes 6,375 13,390 21,106 24,709 28,473 32,404 36,510 40,797 45,273 49,885 Total $ - $ 48,878 $ 102,655 $ 161,810 $ 189,438 $ 218,295 $ 248,433 $ 279,907 $ 312,774 $ 347,093 $ 382,449 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase $ 260,084 $ 44,401 $ 28,519 $ 4,170 $ 24,789 $ 6,188 $ 21,781 $ 7,884 $ 22,563 $ 9,467 '. Coverage After Rate Increase 4.15 4.72 5.38 6.14 6.36 6.64 6.94 7.26 7.58 7.85 8.19 Operating Reserve Ending Balance $ 710,084 $ 391,713 $ 406,124 $ 410,294 $ 435,083 $ 441,270 $ 463,051 $ 470,935 $ 493,498 $ 502,965 $ 502,965 Operating Reserve Target Balance $ 281,160 $ 293,785 $ 304,593 $ 316,038 $ 328,172 $ 341,053 $ 354,744 $ 369,314 $ 384,839 $ 401,402 $ 419,093 # of Days of Cash Operating Expenses 114 Days 60 Days 60 Days 58 Days 60 Days 58 Days 59 Days 57 Days 58 Days 56 Days 54 Days Prepared by FCS GROUP Edmonds DRAFT Storm (425)867-1802 Packet Pg. 188 2.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 April 2019 Monthly Financial Report Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Sarah Mager Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and move to full council on consent Narrative April 2019 Monthly Financial Report Attachments: April 2019 Monthly Financial Report with P&L Packet Pg. 189 I 2.6.a I OF EDP � d 1)7 C. 1 $9v CITY OF EDMONDS MONTHLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT APRIL 2019 Packet Pg. 190 1 I 2.6.a I Page 1 of 1 C ITY O F IDMO NDS REVENUES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount No. Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Receives 001 GENERAL FUND $ 40,866,194 $ 9,270,240 $ 10,236,291 $ 30,629,903 25 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 437,980 3,313 - 437,980 0 011 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 28,210 8,590 - 28,210 0 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 182,400 51,784 - 182,400 0 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,230 70 - 5,230 0 017 MARSH RESTORATION & PRESERVATION FUND 556,800 6,850 1,445 555,355 0 O0. 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND - - - - 0 N 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND - - - - 0 •� v 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 165,430 40,206 6,531 158,899 4 R C 111 STREET FUND 1,859,270 485,352 457,944 1,401,326 25 'L 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 1 7,139,933 1,821,448 745,355 6,394,578 10 t 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 150,910 14,172 17,968 132,942 12 r� C 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE 580 171 222 358 38 2 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 94,730 22,508 26,128 68,602 28 0) C 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 26,170 9,965 10,696 15,474 41 N 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 1,680 236 167 1,513 10 'L 0 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 31,250 13,344 8,424 22,826 27 v 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 2 1,597,600 638,088 387,843 1,209,757 24 J a 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 2 1,604,020 642,818 392,467 1,211,553 24 z 127 GIFTSCATALOGFUND 88,100 38,975 85,863 2,237 97 .3 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 182,560 40,766 51,324 131,236 28 O 0 C. 136 PARKSTRUST FUND 4,870 1,484 1,871 2,999 38 ) 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 44,500 13,096 17,083 27,417 38 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 10,240 72 93 10,147 1 v C 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - 49,678 49,852 (49,852) 0 to C 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 12,400 - 18,732 (6,332) 151 IL 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 716,420 - - 716,420 0 C 332 PARKS CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND 2,885,649 97,979 47,886 2,837,763 2 0 411 COMBINED UTILITY OPERATION - 50,907 49,848 (49,848) 0 am 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 3 10,473,626 2,723,856 2,895,472 7,578,154 28 T N 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 3 5,461,148 1,749,858 2,068,442 3,392,706 38 'Q 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 4 14,386,296 3,813,387 4,618,691 9,767,605 32 Q 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,995,280 2 4 1,995,276 0 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,763,760 582,628 604,981 1,158,779 34 t 512 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND 1,101,798 424,495 368,318 733,480 33 v O 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 72,040 1,996 2,425 69,615 3 Q $ 93,947,074 $ 22,618,333 $ 23,172,367 $ 70,774,707 25' 1 Differences primarily due to prior year Grant Billings 2 Differences primarily due to a $418,216 deposit in total for Real Estate Excise Taxin March 2018 from the State. 3 Differences primarily due to a 9%increase in water, a 10%increase in storm, and a 1.45%decrease in water tax. 4 Differences due to contributed capital billings to WWTP partnersin 2019, as well as 9.5%increase in sewer. 1 .Pack__ .,_ 191 rac,ecei Pg. iy i 2.6•a Page 1 of 1 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount No. Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent 001 GENERAL FUND $ 45,296,523 $ 13,366,102 $ 13,957,552 $ 31,338,971 310/ 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 466,920 151,743 158,691 308,229 340i 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,400 5,533 (133) 1020i 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND - 1,862 (1,862) 00i 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND 200,000 - 200,000 00/ 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 45,800 32,939 - 45,800 00/ Q. 111 STREET FUND 2,252,028 656,567 741,056 1,510,972 d 330i 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 6,892,395 773,281 224,939 6,667,456 30/ •v 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 181,880 11,208 9,895 171,985 501 C 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 100,400 12,349 28,394 72,006 280/ j,i 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 26,880 - - 26,880 00i 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 3,000 731 1,377 1,623 460i C 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 32,000 2,141 4,315 27,685 13°/ 2 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 3,373,286 170,585 286,867 3,086,419 90/ c 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 3,872,301 26,373 82,587 3,789,714 N 20i - •L 127 GIFT S CATALOG FUND 99,754 154 24,643 75,111 250i 0 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 194,707 64,420 56,243 138,464 290i J 136 PARKS TRUST FUND 5,000 - 2,465 2,535 490i a 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 10,500 372 357 10,143 30i 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 5 - 24,284 23,243 (23,243) 00i 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 12,400 - - 12,400 00/ 0 0. 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 716,410 - - 716,410 00i w 332 PARKS CAP IT AL CONSTRUCTION FUND 3,997,428 49,470 20,196 3,977,232 10i t� 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 12,938,995 2,297,283 2,727,242 10,211,753 210i 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 10,018,035 944,759 1,253,871 8,764,164 130/ LL 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 17,721,484 2,389,536 2,515,138 15,206,346 140i t 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,991,210 - - 1,991,210 00/ O 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 2,933,431 454,663 687,194 2,246,237 23°i 512 TECHNOLOGYRENTALFUND 1,179,911 351,042 370,014 809,897 310/ 0 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 78,627 27,158 26,858 51,769 340/ N $ 114,646,705 $ 21,807,159 $ 23,210,530 $ 91,436,175 •L 20°r 5 Business Improvement District is not included in the City Budget; activity is here for reporting purposes only. 2 Packet Pg. 192 2.6.a Page 1 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining % Received TAXIES: 1 REAL PERSONAL / PROPERTY TAX 2 EMSPROPERTY TAX 3 VOTED PROPERTY TAX 4 LOCAL RETAIL SALES/USE TAX 6 5 NATURAL GAS USE TAX 6 1/10 SALES TAX LOCAL CRIM JUST 7 ELECTRIC UTILITY TAX 8 GASUTILITY TAX 9 SOLID WASTE UTILITY TAX 10 WATER UTILITY TAX 11 SEWERUTILITYTAX 12 STORMWATER UTILITY TAX 13 T.V. CABLE UTILITY TAX 14 TELEPHONE UTILITY TAX 15 PULLTABSTAX 16 AMUSEMENT GAMES 17 LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX LIC INS ES AND PERMITS: 18 FIRE PERMITS -SPECIAL USE 19 POLICE - FINGERPRINTING 20 AMUSEMENTS 21 VENDING MACHINE/CONCESSION 22 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT-COMCAST 23 FRANCHISE FEE-EDUCATION/GOVERNMENT 24 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -VERIZON/FRONT IER 25 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -BLACKROCK 26 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT FRANCHISE 27 GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 28 DEV SERV PERMIT SURCHARGE 29 NON-RESIDENT BUS LICENSE 30 RIGHT OF WAY FRANCHISE FEE 31 BUILDING STRUCTURE PERMITS 32 ANIMAL LICENSES 33 STREET AND CURB PERMIT 34 OTRNON-BUSLIC/PERMITS INTERGOVERNMENTAL: 35 DOI 15-0404-0-1-754 - BULLET PROOF VEST 36 NCHIP GRANT 36 WA ASSOC OF SHERIFF'S TRAFFIC GRANT 37 TARGET ZERO TEAMS GRANT 38 HIGH VISIBILITY ENFORCEMENT 39 STATE GRANTS- BUDGET ONLY 40 PUD PRIVILEDGE TAX 41 DOCKSIDE DRILLS GRANT REIMBURSE 42 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM DOE 43 MVET/SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION 44 TRIAL COURT IMPROVEMENT 45 CRIMINAL JUSTICE -SPECIAL PROGRAMS 46 MARIJUANA EXCISE TAX DISTRIBUTION 47 DUI - CITIES 48 LIQUOR EXCISE TAX 49 LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS 50 VERDANT INTERLOCAL GRANTS 51 FIRST RESPONDERS FLEX FUND $ 10,548,203 $ 791,140 $ 826,082 $ 9,722,121 80/c 4,044,220 302,862 319,059 3,725,161 80/( 500 2,265 63 437 130/( 7,825,000 2,452,585 2,636,953 5,188,047 340/( 8,100 - 4,297 3,803 530/( 779,500 242,907 251,132 528,368 320/( 1,691,300 714,751 720,176 971,125 430/( 626,600 323,194 300,757 325,843 480/( 350,900 112,891 114,576 236,324 330/( 1,211,800 345,412 341,487 870,313 280/( 840,900 252,850 276,958 563,942 330/( 446,300 145,689 160,612 285,688 360/( 862,100 274,463 266,381 595,719 310/( 967,200 350,982 292,121 675,079 300/( 53,500 26,597 29,282 24,219 5501( 40 - - 40 00/( 251,900 68,005 76,543 175,357 300/( 30,508,063 6,406,593 6,616,478 23,891,585 220/( 250 125 60 190 240/( 450 200 225 225 5001( 6,330 3,475 4,675 1,655 740/( 50,000 879 1,213 48,787 2°/ 713,500 345,926 336,861 376,639 470/( 41,200 13,906 13,895 27,305 340/( 106,900 26,966 25,371 81,529 240/( 14,000 3,734 - 14,000 0°/ 325,100 67,668 77,912 247,188 240/( 122,200 68,159 58,660 63,540 480/( 63,400 26,795 20,500 42,900 320/( 75,900 35,800 37,650 38,250 5001( 15,000 50,816 13,460 1,540 900/( 703,600 211,465 138,372 565,228 200/( 27,500 7,775 6,756 20,744 250/( 50,000 18,358 15,073 34,927 300/( 18,500 6,483 7,039 11,461 380/( 2,333,830 888,529 757,721 1,576,109 320/( 6,006 - - 6,006 0% 14,616 - - 14,616 0% 2,285 - 2,285 - 100% 4,000 1,169 675 3,325 17% 7,100 2,028 - 7,100 0% 18,000 - - 18,000 0°/ 199,500 - - 199,500 0% - - 1,014 (1,014) 0% - - 6,453 (6,453) 0% 13,800 6,100 7,700 44% 16,716 8,594 8,122 51% 45,600 22,004 23,596 48% 45,000 15,049 29,951 33% 6,000 3,041 2,959 51% 215,000 114,594 100,406 53% 342,000 85,246 256,754 25% - - - 0% - - (705) 0% 935 623 28% 5,847 8,768 21,184 30,559 3,050 104,405 85,480 5,810 268,299 705 265,759 669,864 Q s 2019 Local Retail Sales/Use Tax revenues are $184,368 higher than 2018 revenues. Please also seepages pages 18 & 19. 3 Packet Pg. 193 1 Title CHARGES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES: 1 RECORD/LEGAL INSTRUMENTS 2 ATM SURCHARGE FEES 3 CREDIT CARD FEES 4 COURT RECORD SERVICES 5 D/M COURT REC SER 6 WARRANT PREPARATION FEE 7 IT TIME PAY FEE 8 MUNIC.-DIST. COURT CURR EXPEN 9 SALE MAPS & BOOKS 10 CLERKS TIME FOR SALE OF PARKING PERMITS 11 BID SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 12 PHOTOCOPIES 13 POLICE DISCLOSURE REQUESTS 14 ENGINEERING FEES AND CHARGES 15 ELECTION CANDIDATE FILINGFEES 16 SNO-ISLE 17 PASSPORTS AND NATURALIZATION FEES 18 POLICE SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS 19 CAMPUS SAFETY-EDM. SCH. DIST. 20 WOODWAY-LAW PROTECTION 21 MISCELLANEOUS POLICE SERVICES 22 FIRE DISTRICT #1 STATION BILLINGS 23 LEGAL SERVICES 24 FIRE PROTECTION & EMS FOR DUI 25 ADULT PROBATION SERVICE CHARGE 26 BOOKING FEES 27 FIRE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES 28 EMERGENCY SERVICE FEES 29 EMS TRANSPORT USER FEE 30 FLEX FUEL PAYMENTS FROM STATIONS 31 ANIMAL CONTROL SHELTER 32 ZONING/SUBDIVISION FEE 33 PLAN CHECKING FEES 34 FIRE PLAN CHECK FEES 35 PLANNING 1% INSPECTION FEE 36 S.E.P.A. REVIEW 37 CRITICAL AREA STUDY 38 DV COORDINATOR SERVICES 39 GYM AND WEIGHTROOM FEES 40 PROGRAM FEES 41 TAXABLE RECREATION ACTIVITIES 42 WINTER MARKET REGISTRATION FEES 43 BIRD FEST REGISTRATION FEES 44 INTERFUND REIMBURSEMENT -CONTRACT SVCS 2.6.a Page 2 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received 3,000 1,648 400 2,600 130/( 400 88 62 339 150 10,000 4,564 4,281 5,719 430/( - 30 70 (70) 00/( 300 60 30 270 100/( 5,500 1,774 4,294 1,206 780 1,000 324 496 504 5001( 100 32 79 21 790/( 100 14 32 68 320/( 25,100 - - 25,100 0°/ 600 - - 600 00/( 1,000 274 225 775 220/( 500 69 - 500 00/c 200,000 53,367 61,022 138,978 310/( - 1,486 - - 00/c 78,000 46,254 20,727 57,273 270/( 21,000 7,510 9,935 11,065 470/( 30,000 - - 30,000 0°/ 125,550 - 36,252 89,298 290/( 193,067 24,488 115,333 77,734 600/( 1,500 - 2 1,498 00/( 50,000 30,336 30,727 19,273 610/( - 145 801 (801) 00/( - - 117 (117) 0°/ 54,000 18,247 15,122 38,878 280/( 400 556 1,231 (831) 308% 12,560 6,105 5,705 6,855 4501( 3,000 939 2,595 405 860/( 852,100 186,348 246,163 605,937 290/( 2,500 1,245 629 1,871 250/( 50 - - 50 00/( 102,300 60,092 44,395 57,905 430/( 425,900 121,752 247,101 178,799 580/( 6,500 3,690 2,965 3,535 460/( 1,000 - - 1,000 00/( 5,000 4,690 2,930 2,070 590/( 14,000 6,500 5,450 8,550 390/( 2,046 3,935 4,707 (2,661) 2300/( 13,000 5,968 4,713 8,287 360/( 910,740 399,865 367,703 543,037 400/( 1,300 235 501 799 390/( 5,000 - - 5,000 00/( 1,000 - - 1,000 00/( 2,624,792 322,879 938,419 1,686,373 36°/ 5,783,905 1,315,508 2,175,214 3,608,691 380/ Q 4 Packet Pg. 194 1 2.6.a Page 3 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received FINES AND PENALTIES: 1 PROOF OF VEHICLE INS PENALTY 2 TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 3 NC TRAFFIC INFRACTION 4 CRT COST FEE CODE LEG ASSESSMENT (LGA) 5 NON -TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 6 OTHERINFRACTIONS'04 7 PARKINGINFRACTION PENALTIES 8 PARK/INDDISZONE 9 DWI PENALTIES 10 DUI - DP ACCT 11 CRIM CNV FEE DUI 12 DUI - DP FEE 13 OTHER CRIMINAL TRAF MISDEM PEN 14 CRIMINAL TRAFFIC MISDEMEANOR 8/03 15 CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CT 16 CRIM CONV FEE CT 17 OTHER NON-T RAF MISDEMEANOR PEN 18 OTHER NON TRAFFIC MISD. 8/03 19 COURT DV PENALTY ASSESSMENT 20 CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CN 21 CRIM CONV FEE CN 22 PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOUPMENT 23 BANK CHARGE FOR CONY. DEFENDANT 24 COURT COST RECOUPMENT 25 BUS. LICENSE PERMIT PENALTY 26 MISC FINES AND PENALTIES MISCELLANEOUS: 27 INVESTMENT INTEREST 28 INTEREST ON COUNTY TAXES 29 INTEREST - COURT COLLECTIONS 30 PARKING 31 SPACE/FACILITIESRENTALS 32 BRACKET ROOM RENTAL 33 LEASESLONG-TERM 34 DONATION/CONTRIBUTION 35 PARKSDONATIONS 36 BIRD FEST CONTRIBUTIONS 37 POLICE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PRIV SOURCES 38 SALE OF JUNK/SALVAGE 39 SALES OF UNCLAIM PROPERTY 40 CONFISCATED AND FORFEITED PROPERTY 41 OTHER JUDGEMENT/SETTLEMENT 42 POLICE JUDGMENT SiRESI'ITUTION 43 CASHIERS OVERAGES/SHORTAGES 44 OTHER MISC REVENUES 45 SMALL OVERPAYMENT 46 NSF FEES - PARKS & REC 47 NSF FEES - MUNICIPAL COURT 48 US BANK REBATE TRANSFERS -IN: 49 TRANSFER FROM FUND 127 TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE 7,500 2,960 1,302 6,198 170/( 290,000 95,809 82,042 207,958 280/( 31,000 12,560 7,221 23,779 230/( 38,000 12,711 6,330 31,670 170/( 1,000 3,300 - 1,000 00/c 800 337 474 326 590/( 159,000 51,988 52,387 106,613 330/( 800 418 1,108 (308) 1390/( 6,000 2,607 2,912 3,088 490/( 1,000 309 165 835 170/( 200 37 42 158 210/( 1,500 270 771 729 510/( 135 69 - 135 00/( 30,000 9,729 13,046 16,954 430/( 3,600 1,113 1,059 2,541 290/( 1,000 396 268 732 270/( 100 - (2,792) 2,892 -27920/1 13,000 4,472 4,862 8,138 370/( 600 279 125 475 210/( 1,600 578 357 1,243 220/( 500 197 133 367 270/( 18,500 6,355 4,578 13,922 250/( 12,000 4,004 5,038 6,962 420/( 7,000 3,050 1,689 5,311 240/( 10,000 9,110 5,150 4,850 520/( 300 - 895 (595) 2980/( 635,135 222,658 189,163 445,972 300% 248,160 49,954 122,227 125,933 490/( 9,210 3,352 6,228 2,982 680/( 3,000 3,415 3,026 (26) 1010/( 3,611 - - 00/( 153,000 31,425 17,160 135,840 110/( 5,000 900 1,210 3,790 240/( 185,000 65,127 70,856 114,144 380/( 7,000 1,281 3,473 3,527 500/( 4,350 2,880 350 4,000 80/( 1,500 210 220 1,280 1501( 9,768 - - 9,768 00/( 300 58 68 232 230/( 3,000 738 1,351 1,649 450/c 2,000 - - 2,000 00/( 2,000 - 3 1,997 0°/ 200 30 339 (139) 1700/( - 23 (152) 152 0°/ 2,000 2,289 1,987 13 990/( 30 27 36 (6) 1210/( 20 - - 20 0°/ 300 80 83 217 280/( 7,500 3,254 3,491 4,009 470/( 643,338 168,652 231,956 411,382 36°/ 26,300 - - 26,300 0°/ 26,300 - - 26,300 0°/ $ 40,866,194 $ 9,270,240 $ 10,236,291 $ 30,629,903 250/ Q 5 Packet Pg. 195 2.6.a Page 1 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DEIAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES (001) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 16,416,248 $ 4,716,708 $ 5,059,147 $ 11,357,101 310/ 2 OVERTIME 488,380 205,604 245,467 242,913 5001 3 HOLIDAY BUY BACK 250,491 - 4,704 245,787 20/ 4 BENEFITS 6,106,801 1,858,548 2,041,128 4,065,673 330/ 5 UNIFORMS 90,475 28,750 49,873 40,602 5501 6 SUPPLIES 376,780 118,659 151,704 225,076 400/ 7 SMALL EQUIPMENT 219,379 15,773 61,835 157,544 280/ 8 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,984,721 699,473 4,589,549 10,395,172 310/ 9 COMMUNICATIONS 157,435 40,641 43,651 113,784 280/ 10 TRAVEL 66,280 9,723 16,905 49,375 260/ 11 EXCISE TAXES 6,500 740 739 5,761 110/ 12 RENTAL/LEASE 1,842,569 652,861 617,681 1,224,888 340/ 13 INSURANCE 431,095 437,253 436,448 (5,353) 1010/ 14 UTILITIES 460,625 152,534 162,988 297,637 3501 15 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 584,030 116,774 243,755 340,275 420/ 16 MISCELLANEOUS 561,304 153,669 156,978 404,326 280/ 17 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 7 - 3,819,451 - - 00/ 18 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 75,000 305,715 75,000 - 1000/ 19 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 1,953,108 - - 1,953,108 00/ 20 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 27,042 33,227 - 27,042 00/ 21 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 183,710 - - 183,710 00/ 22 OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS 500 - 500 00/ 23 INTEREST ON LONG TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 14,050 - - 14,050 00/ 45,296,523 13,366,102 S 13,957,552 31,338,971 31°l LEO FF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE (009) 24 BENEFITS $ 206,650 $ 73,262 $ 66,262 $ 140,388 320/ 25 PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 252,990 76,281 92,004 160,986 360/ 26 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,000 1,800 - 7,000 00/ 27 MISCELLANEOUS 280 400 425 (145) 1520/ 466,920 151,743 158,691 308,229 340/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND (014) 28 SUPPLIES $ 100 $ $ - $ 100 00/ 29 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 200 - 200 00/ 30 MISCELLANEOUS 5,100 5,533 (433) 1080/ 5,400 5,533 $ (133) 1020/ EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSEFUND (018) 31 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ - $ $ 1,862 $ (1,862) 00/ - 1,862 (1,862) 00/ EDMONDS OPIOED RESPONSEFUND (019) 32 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES $ 200,000 $ $ - $ 200,000 00/ 200,000 - 200,000 0°/ DRUG INFO RC EMENT FUND (104) 33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 45,000 $ $ - $ 45,000 00/ 34 REPAIR/MAINT 800 - 800 00/ 35 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES - 32,939 - - 00/ 45,800 32,939 - 45,800 0°/ O d A C O C li t C O 2 CD T 0 N �L M Q 7 The difference for "intergovernmental services" and "professional services" is due to a change in BARS coding. 6 Packet Pg. 196 I 2.6.a I Page 2 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent S TREET FUND (111) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 795,977 $ 167,117 $ 174,700 $ 621,277 220/ 2 OVERTIME 35,900 8,713 24,825 11,075 690/ 3 BENEFITS 264,125 87,067 86,378 177,747 330/ 4 UNIFORMS 6,000 3,062 3,278 2,722 5501 5 SUPPLIES 335,000 80,107 107,480 227,520 320/ 6 SMALL EQUIPMENT 20,000 - 14 19,986 00/ 7 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 26,140 4,622 5,948 20,192 230/ 8 COMMUNICATIONS 4,500 2,466 1,998 2,502 440/ 9 TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 00/ 10 RENTAL/LEASE 268,280 61,877 88,872 179,408 330/ 11 INSURANCE 153,881 156,645 156,514 (2,633) 1020/ 12 UTILITIES 276,605 73,149 76,254 200,351 280/ 13 REPAIRS&MAINTENANCE 52,000 11,038 14,444 37,556 280/ 14 MISCELLANEOUS 8,000 704 352 7,648 40/ 15 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 4,040 - - 4,040 00/ 16INTEREST 580 - - 580 00/ $ 2,252,028 $ 656,567 $ 741,056 $ 1,510,972 330/ COMBINED STREETC0NST/IMPROVE(112) 17 SALARIES AND WAGES 18 BENEFITS 19 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 21 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 22 LAND 23 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 24 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 25 INTEREST MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND (117) 26 SUPPLIES 27 SMALL EQUIPMENT 28 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 29 TRAVEL 30 RENTAL/LEASE 31 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 32 MISCELLANEOUS HOTEL/MOTEL, TAX REVENUE FUND (120) 33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 34 MISCELLANEOUS 35 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND (121) 36 SUPPLIES 37 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND (122) 38 MISCELLANEOUS TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS (123) 39 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 40 MISCELLANEOUS $ - $ 2,577 $ - $ - 00/ 961 2,100 - 961 00/ 3,893,563 3,044 108,632 3,784,931 30/ 1,138,238 - 5,394 1,132,845 00/ 47,710 - 47,710 00/ 38,500 - - 38,500 00/ 1,698,873 765,561 110,914 1,587,959 70/ 72,220 - - 72,220 00/ 2,330 - - 2,330 00/ $ 6,892,395 $ 773,281 $ 224,939 $ 6,667,456 30/ $ 4,700 $ 18 $ 153 $ 4,547 30/ 1,700 - - 1,700 00/ 166,500 9,553 7,310 159,190 40/ 80 9 6 74 80/ 2,000 - - 2,000 00/ 300 - - 300 00/ 6,600 1,628 2,426 4,174 370/ $ 181,880 $ 11,208 $ 9,895 $ 171,985 501 $ 95,400 $ 12,349 $ 27,811 $ 67,589 290/ 1,000 - 583 417 580/ 4,000 - - 4,000 00/ $ 100,400 $ 12,349 $ 28,394 $ 72,006 280/ $ 1,790 $ $ - $ 1,790 00/ 25,090 - 25,090 00/ $ 26,880 $ $ - $ 26,880 00/ $ 3,000 $ 731 $ 1,377 $ 1,623 460/ $ 3,000 $ 731 $ 1,377 $ 1,623 460/ $ 28,500 $ 2,141 $ 4,315 $ 24,185 1501 3,500 - - 3,500 00/ $ 32,000 $ 2,141 $ 4,315 $ 27,685 130/ ly Q 7 Packet Pg. 197 I 2.6.a I Page 3 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent REAL ES TATE EXC IS E TAX 2 (125) 1 SUPPLIES $ 21,000 $ 28,375 $ 21,368 $ (368) 1020/ 2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 586,505 23,722 85,792 500,713 1501 3 RENTAL/LEASE - - 381 (381) 00/ 4 REPAIRS&MAINTENANCE 591,156 12,794 578,362 20/ 5 LAND 100,000 - - 100,000 00/ 6 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 2,074,625 118,488 166,533 1,908,092 80/ REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX I, PARKS ACQ (126) 7 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 9 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 10 LAND 11 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 12 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 13 INTEREST GIFTS CATALOG FUND (127) 14 SUPPLIES 15 SMALL EQUIPMENT 16 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 17 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 18 MISCELLANEOUS 19 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES C EWEIERY MAINTENANC FAMPRO VEMENT (130) 20 SALARIES AND WAGES 21 OVERTIME 22 BENEFITS 23 UNIFORMS 24 SUPPLIES 25 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 26 SMALL EQUIPMENT 27 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28 COMMUNICATIONS 29 TRAVEL 30 RENTAL/LEASE 31 UTILITIES 32 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 33 MISCELLANEOUS PARES TRUSTFUND (136) 34 SMALL EQUIPMENT 35 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES SISTER CITY COMMISSION (138) 36 SUPPLIES 37 TRAVEL 38 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS IMPROVEMENTDISTRICTFUND (140) 39 SUPPLIES 40 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 41 MISCELLANEOUS LID FUND C O NTRO L (211) 42 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVIC FUND (231) 43 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 44 INTEREST $ 3,373,286 $ 170,585 $ 286,867 $ 3,086,419 90/ r- $ 204,650 $ 26,124 $ 45,971 158,679 220/ O 658,879 - 19,719 639,160 30/ y 133,030 - 133,030 00/ 100,000 - - 100,000 00/ 2,748,902 248 16,896 2,732,006 10/ .� 23,480 - - 23,480 00/ 3,360 - - 3,360 00/ C $ 3,872,301 $ 26,373 $ 82,587 $ 3,789,714 20/ li $ 39,779 $ $ 24,069 $ 15,710 610/ 15,325 574 14,751 40/ O 6,500 - 6,500 00/ 2 11,250 - 11,250 00/ Im 600 154 - 600 00/ N 26,300 - - 26,300 00/ _ $ 99,754 $ 154 $ 24,643 $ 75,111 250/ .0. Q $ 93,593 $ 24,657 $ 26,255 $ 67,338 28"/ v 3,500 832 1,524 1,976 440/ -j 38,909 11,303 12,533 26,376 320/ d 1,000 - 225 775 230/ 7,000 14,370 168 6,832 20/ '3 20,000 5,792 4,621 15,379 230/ - - 1,246 (1,246) 00/ O 4,200 352 176 4,024 40/ 0 1,410 524 652 758 460/ 500 - - 500 00/ 6,260 3,880 2,087 4,173 330/ 75 3,835 1,373 1,300 2,535 340/ r- 500 - - 500 00/ 14,000 1,336 5,456 8,544 390/ $ 194,707 $ 64,420 $ 56,243 $ 138,464 299 $ 5,000 $ $ 2,465 $ 2,535 490/ - - - 00/ $ 5,000 $ $ 2,465 $ 2,535 490/ $ 1,500 $ 27 $ - $ 1,500 00/ 4,500 - 4,500 00/ 4,500 345 357 4,143 80/ $ 10,500 $ 372 $ 357 $ 10,143 30/ $ $ 73 $ 4,251 $ (4,251) 00/ 23,371 18,043 (18,043) 00/ 840 950 (950) 00/ 24,284 23,243 (23,243 00r $ 12,400 $ $ - $ 12,400 00/ $ 12,400 $ $ - $ 12,400 00/ $ 609,630 $ $ - $ 609,630 00/ 106,780 - 106,780 00/ $ 716,410 $ $ - $ 716,410 00/ 8 Packet Pg. 198 2.6.a Page 4 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (332) 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 4,760 $ - $ 8,510 $ (3,750) 1794 2 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 3,992,668 49,470 11,686 3,980,982 04 $ 3,997,428 $ 49,470 $ 20,196 $ 3,977,232 14 WATER FUND (421) 3 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 845,003 $ 242,954 $ 260,259 $ 584,744 314 4 OVERTIME 24,000 6,027 9,160 14,840 384 5 BENEFITS 371,025 104,600 124,281 246,744 334 6 UNIFORMS 4,000 2,222 1,302 2,698 334 7 SUPPLIES 150,000 27,124 17,664 132,336 124 8 FUEL CONSUMED - 70 - - 04 9 WATER PURCHASED FOR RESALE 1,950,000 439,137 447,006 1,502,994 234 10 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 170,000 33,630 24,313 145,687 140 11 SMALL EQUIPMENT 11,000 1,473 1,577 9,423 144 12 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 878,372 109,261 287,585 590,787 334 13 COMMUNICATIONS 30,000 9,203 7,516 22,484 254 14 TRAVEL 200 - - 200 04 15 EXCISE TAXES 8 1,649,700 135,402 486,670 1,163,030 304 16 RENTAL/LEASE 155,532 47,850 51,177 104,355 334 17 INSURANCE 54,423 56,738 55,096 (673) 1010 18 UTILITIES 35,310 9,388 10,447 24,863 304 19 REPAIRS& MAINTENANCE 1,603,100 14,141 13,275 1,589,825 14 20 MISCELLANEOUS 121,400 37,859 42,055 79,345 354 21 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES - 8,768 - - 04 22 INTERFUND TAXES 8 - 345,412 - 04 23 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 646,370 - 646,370 04 24 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 15,000 - - 15,000 04 25 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 3,614,690 666,024 887,859 2,726,831 254 26 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 2,710 - - 2,710 04 27 REVENUE BONDS 355,740 355,740 04 28 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 25,840 25,840 04 29 INTEREST 225,580 - - 225,580 04 $ 12,938,995 $ 2,297,283 $ 2,727,242 $ 10,211,753 214 STORM FUND (422) 30 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 702,584 $ 217,064 $ 235,645 $ 466,939 344 31 OVERTIME 29,000 2,896 26,898 2,102 934 32 BENEFITS 360,829 110,357 123,559 237,270 340 33 UNIFORMS 6,500 4,629 4,452 2,048 684 34 SUPPLIES 46,000 12,432 16,023 29,977 354 35 SMALL EQUIPMENT 4,000 74 375 3,625 94 36 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,711,075 83,525 342,970 1,368,105 204 37 COMMUNICATIONS 3,200 1,634 1,462 1,739 464 38 TRAVEL 4,300 - - 4,300 04 39 EXCISE TAXES 8 470,100 23,688 186,676 283,424 404 40 RENTAL/LEASE 246,404 82,176 81,590 164,814 334 41 INSURANCE 125,390 178,798 127,548 (2,158) 1020 42 UTILITES 10,710 3,471 3,977 6,733 374 43 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 439,568 9,490 9,829 429,739 24 44 MISCELLANEOUS 113,100 32,240 59,673 53,427 530 45 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES - 18,375 - - 04 46 INTERFUND TAXES AND OPERATING ASSESSMENT 8 - 145,689 - 04 47 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 297,750 - - 297,750 04 48 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 4,987,891 18,222 33,194 4,954,697 14 49 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 98,900 - - 98,900 04 50 REVENUE BONDS 173,940 173,940 04 51 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 55,639 55,639 04 52 INTEREST 131,155 - - 131,155 04 $ 10,018,035 $ 944,759 $ 1,253,871 $ 8,764,164 130 ly Q 8 The difference for "interfund taxes" and "excise taxes" is due to a change in BARS coding. 9 I Packet Pg. 199 1 I 2.6.a I Page 5 of 6 CITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent SEWER FUND (423) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 1,850,763 $ 554,317 $ 598,247 $ 1,252,516 320 2 OVERTIME 95,000 29,611 33,554 61,446 350 3 BENEFITS 815,177 246,725 252,750 562,427 310 4 UNIFORMS 9,500 4,882 4,530 4,970 480 5 SUPPLIES 417,200 84,995 88,734 328,466 210 6 FUEL CONSUMED 80,000 19,419 5,842 74,158 74 7 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INV OR RESALE 4,000 - - 4,000 00 8 SMALL EQUIPMENT 50,000 16,506 2,585 47,415 54 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,599,670 233,982 407,354 1,192,316 250 10 COMMUNICATIONS 43,000 14,760 11,614 31,386 270 11 TRAVEL 5,000 2,122 - 5,000 09 12 EXCISE TAXES 9 973,000 71,477 360,306 612,694 370 13 RENTAL/LEASE 313,469 102,174 118,485 194,984 380 14 INSURANCE 184,261 117,717 184,604 (343) 1000 15 UTILITIES 1,231,310 234,539 215,285 1,016,025 170 16 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 695,000 107,759 94,109 600,891 140 17 MISCELLANEOUS 125,650 37,455 33,696 91,954 270 18 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES - 37,612 - - 04 19 INTERFUND TAXESAND OPERATING ASSESSMENT 9 20 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 21 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 22 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 23 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 24 REVENUE BONDS 25 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 26 INTEREST 27 OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS BOND RESERVE FUND (424) 28 REVENUE BONDS 29 INTEREST - 252,850 - 04 2,420,671 - 2,420,671 00 30,000 23,674 - 30,000 09 6,300,393 176,677 83,158 6,217,235 14 150,050 - - 150,050 00 80,340 - - 80,340 00 172,540 14,045 14,371 158,169 84 75,490 3,557 3,371 72,119 40 - 2,683 2,543 (2,543) 00 $ 17,721,484 $ 2,389,536 $ 2,515,138 $ 15,206,346 140 $ 740,010 $ $ $ 740,010 04 1,251,200 1,251,200 00 $ 1,991,210 $ $ $ 1,991,210 00 9 The difference for "interfund taxes" and "excise taxes" is due to a change in BARS coding. ly O d C ea C li Z C O 2 CD T 0 N �L M Q 10 Packet Pg. 200 I 2.6.a I Page 6 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent EQ UIPMENT RENTAL FUND (511) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 259,309 $ 82,036 $ 87,063 $ 172,246 340 2 OVERTIME 2,000 - 8,081 (6,081) 4040 3 BENEFITS 113,207 35,519 38,720 74,487 340 4 UNIFORMS 1,000 723 977 23 980 5 S'UPPLIES 110,000 24,028 49,086 60,914 450 6 FUEL CONSUMED 1,000 - - 1,000 00 7 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 273,000 57,078 46,610 226,390 170 8 SMALL EQUIPMENT 58,000 1,356 385 57,615 14 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 46,580 2,189 478 46,102 14 10 COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 742 719 2,281 240 11 TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 00 12 RENTAL/LEASE 14,120 3,147 4,566 9,554 320 13 INSURANCE 32,015 29,464 30,167 1,848 940 14 UTILITIES 14,200 5,319 5,907 8,293 420 15 REPAIRS& MAINTENANCE 60,000 8,036 7,811 52,189 130 16 MISCELLANEOUS 12,000 1,516 4,684 7,316 390 17 MACHINERYBQUIPMENT 1,933,000 203,510 401,941 1,531,059 210 $ 2,933,431 $ 454,663 $ 687,194 $ 2,246,237 23- TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND (512) 18 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 292,502 $ 93,110 $ 94,400 $ 198,102 320 19 OVERTIME 2,000 997 - 2,000 00 20 BENEFITS 97,499 31,140 32,442 65,057 330 21 SUPPLIES 5,000 1,573 1,366 3,634 270 22 SMALL EQUIPMENT 38,000 84,163 23,805 14,195 630 23 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 210,000 1,019 5,379 204,621 34 24 COMMUNICATIONS 58,770 14,143 14,491 44,279 250 25 TRAVEL 1,500 - - 1,500 00 26 RENTAL/LEASE 7,200 1,589 1,719 5,481 240 27 REPAIRS& MAINTENANCE 387,690 116,330 138,161 249,529 360 28 MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 6,978 682 4,318 140 29 MACHINERYBQUIPMENT 74,750 - 57,571 17,179 770 $ 1,179,911 $ 351,042 $ 370,014 $ 809,897 310 FIR]MIEN'S PENSION FUND (617) 30 BENEFITS $ 23,000 $ 9,969 $ 8,469 $ 14,531 370 31 PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 54,427 16,919 18,389 36,038 340 32 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,200 270 - 1,200 09 $ 78,627 $ 27,158 $ 26,858 $ 51,769 340 TOTAL EXPENDITURE ALL FUNDS S 114,646,705 $ 21,807,159 S 23,210,530 $ 91,436,175 200 Q 11 Packet Pg. 201 2.6.a Page 1 of 1 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN SUMMARY 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining CITY COUNCIL OFFICE OF MAYOR HUMAN RESOURCES MUNICIPAL COURT CITY CLERK FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY NON -DEPARTMENTAL POLICE SERVICES COMMUNITY S'ERVICESIECONOMIC DEV DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PARKS& RECREATION PUBLIC WORKS FACILITIES MAINTENANCE % Spent $ 602,387 $ 93,044 $ 112,983 $ 489,404 19% 296,155 97,145 97,904 198,251 33% 590,331 140,435 156,727 433,604 27% 1,143,210 326,606 305,139 838,071 27% 685,420 222,183 243,367 442,053 36% 0 1,244,805 383,670 418,398 826,407 34% d 889,560 252,179 294,517 595,043 3370 v C 13,556,979 4,704,813 4,478,257 9,078,722 33% 11,728,919 3,581,604 3,763,317 7,965,602 32% L, 618,232 179,612 181,514 436,718 29% +z+ C 3,426,322 817,737 924,696 2,501,626 27% 0 4,303,374 1,159,777 1,209,937 3,093,437 28% r 3,296,100 848,683 1,002,774 2,293,326 30% 0 N 2,914,729 558,614 768,024 2,146,705 26% 'L C $ 45,296,523 $ 13,366,102 $ 13,957,552 $ 31,338,971 31% J CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - UTILITY- BY FUND IN SUMMARY Title 2019 Amended Budget 4/30/2018 Expenditures 4/30/2019 Expenditures Amount Remaining %Spent WATER UTILITY FUND $ 12,938,995 $ 2,297,283 $ 2,727,242 $ 10,211,753 21% STORM UTILITY FUND 10,018,035 944,759 1,253,871 8,764,164 13% SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 17,721,484 2,389,536 2,515,138 15,206,346 14% BOND RESERVE FUND 1,991,210 - - 1,991,210 0% $ 42,669,724 $ 5,631,578 $ 6,496,251 $ 36,173,473 15% 12 Packet Pg. 202 Page 1 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DEr'AIL Title 2019 Amended Budget 4/30/2018 Expenditures 4/30/2019 Expenditures Amount Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL SALARIES $ 171,950 $ 52,238 $ 58,573 $ 113,377 34% OVERTIME 1,000 - - 1,000 0% BENEFITS 92,751 30,449 32,159 60,592 35% SUPPLIES 2,000 94 521 1,479 26% SMALL EQUIPMENT - - 342 (342) 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 194,160 200 10,983 183,178 6% COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 1,200 1,627 1,373 54% TRAVEL 6,700 325 1,093 5,607 16% RENTAL/LEASE 11,586 5,441 4,067 7,519 35% REPAIRS/MAINTENANCE 500 - 121 379 24% MISCELLANEOUS 118,740 3,097 3,497 115,243 3% $ 602,387 $ 93,044 $ 112,983 $ 489,404 19% OFFICEOFMAYOR SALARIES $ 215,076 $ 70,102 $ 71,647 $ 143,429 33% BENEFITS 53,257 16,664 17,997 35,260 34% SUPPLIES 1,500 167 147 1,353 10% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,000 165 1,600 1,400 53% COMMUNICATION 1,400 749 300 1,100 21% TRAVEL 3,000 260 952 2,048 32% RENTAL/LEASE 13,472 6,959 4,168 9,304 31% MISCELLANEOUS 5,450 2,077 1,092 4,358 20% $ 296,155 $ 97,145 $ 97,904 $ 198,251 33% HUMAN RESOURCES SALARIES $ 327,939 $ 76,406 $ 83,463 $ 244,476 25% BENEFITS 118,229 29,082 32,647 85,582 28% SUPPLIES 12,300 94 1,608 10,692 13% SMALL EQUIPMENT 300 - - 300 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 81,886 16,476 10,665 71,221 13% COMMUNICATIONS 700 403 308 392 44% TRAVEL 1,000 724 123 877 12% RENTAL/LEASE 22,947 8,739 8,277 14,670 36% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 7,850 7,326 7,571 279 96% MISCELLANEOUS 17,180 1,186 12,064 5,116 70% $ 590,331 $ 140,435 $ 156,727 $ 433,604 27% MUNIC IPAL C O URT SALARIES $ 628,961 $ 189,599 $ 180,977 $ 447,984 29% OVERTIME 800 - 367 433 46% BENEFITS 244,601 75,225 65,040 179,561 27% SUPPLIES 10,600 3,326 1,337 9,263 13% SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,000 - 702 298 70% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 124,925 23,350 24,313 100,612 19% COMMUNICATIONS 3,550 810 779 2,771 22% TRAVEL 6,500 515 384 6,116 6% RENTAL/LEASE 65,251 24,164 21,440 43,811 33% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 4,880 - 277 4,603 6% MISCELLANEOUS 25,100 9,618 9,524 15,576 38% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 27,042 - - 27,042 0% $ 1,143,210 $ 326,606 $ 305,139 $ 838,071 27% O d Q' C e0 C IL 21 t C O 2 O N �L C. Q 13 Packet Pg. 203 1 I 2.6.a I Page 2 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY C LERK SALARIES AND WAGES $ 358,349 $ 113,994 $ 116,793 $ 241,556 33% BENEFITS 151,468 50,287 52,242 99,226 34% SUPPLIES 10,240 1,490 902 9,338 9% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32,310 6,103 8,550 23,760 26% COMMUNICATIONS 40,000 8,322 11,666 28,334 29% TRAVEL 2,000 437 465 1,535 23% RENTAL/LEASE 50,973 19,636 17,337 33,636 34% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 32,080 19,501 31,619 461 99% MISCELLANEOUS 8,000 2,414 3,793 4,207 47% $ 685,420 $ 222,183 $ 243,367 $ 442,053 36% FINANCE SALARIES $ 844,384 $ 240,450 $ 264,512 $ 579,872 31% OVERTIME 4,500 - - 4,500 0% BENEFITS 268,345 77,113 89,444 178,901 33% SUPPLIES 7,350 1,118 2,192 5,158 30% SMALL EQUIPMENT 5,400 3,831 579 4,821 11% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,650 5 29 14,621 0% COMMUNICATIONS 2,000 443 338 1,662 17% TRAVEL 3,100 1,224 281 2,819 9% RENTAL/LEASE 48,226 16,374 16,604 31,622 34% REPAIRIMAINTENANCE 38,500 41,121 42,499 (3,999) 110% MISCELLANEOUS 8,350 1,992 1,920 6,430 23% $ 1,244,805 $ 383,670 $ 418,398 $ 826,407 34% CITY ATTORNEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 889,560 $ 252,179 $ 294,517 $ 595,043 33% $ 889,560 $ 252,179 $ 294,517 $ 595,043 33% NON -DEPARTMENTAL SALARIES $ 101,750 $ - $ - $ 101,750 0% BENEFITS -UNEMPLOYMENT 40,000 2,370 22,812 17,188 57% SUPPLIES 5,000 541 86 4,914 2% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10,666,114 130,737 3,889,598 6,776,516 36% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 740 739 5,761 11% RENTAL/LEASE 10,538 3,673 4,401 6,137 42% INSURANCE 431,095 437,253 436,448 (5,353) 101% MISCELLANEOUS 69,614 48,205 49,173 20,441 71 % INTERGOVT SERVICES - 3,775,579 - - 0% ECA LOAN PAYMENT 75,000 305,715 75,000 - 100% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 1,953,108 - - 1,953,108 0% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 183,710 - 183,710 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM DEBT 14,050 - 14,050 0% FISCAL AGENT FEES 500 500 0% $ 13,556,979 $ 4,704,813 $ 4,478,257 $ 9,078,722 33% Q 14 Packet Pg. 204 Page 3 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PO LIC E S ERVIC FS SALARIES $ 6,916,238 $ 2,053,984 $ 2,136,952 $ 4,779,286 31% OVERTIME 454,780 190,542 227,850 226,930 50% HOLIDAY BUYBACK 250,491 - 4,704 245,787 2% BENEFITS 2,549,180 820,011 868,261 1,680,919 34% UNIFORMS 80,250 24,092 42,770 37,480 53% SUPPLIES 86,500 30,081 54,115 32,385 63% SMALL EQUIPMENT 191,079 8,281 57,806 133,273 30% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 141,770 37,135 27,512 114,258 19% COMMUNICATIONS 32,000 12,874 11,451 20,549 36% TRAVEL 29,310 4,197 6,341 22,969 22% RENTAL/LEASE 920,851 326,938 305,338 615,513 33% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 15,120 3,566 2,872 12,248 19% MISCELLANEOUS 61,350 36,675 17,345 44,005 28% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 33,227 0% $ 11,728,919 $ 3,581,604 $ 3,763,317 $ 7,965,602 32% COMMUNITY S ERVIC ES /EC 0 N DEV. SALARIES $ 245,505 $ 78,587 $ 82,398 $ 163,107 34% BENEFITS 76,033 24,725 26,303 49,730 35% SUPPLIES 7,000 5,694 5,583 1,417 80% SMALL EQUIPMENT 800 - - 800 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 262,400 63,183 59,570 202,830 23% COMMUNICATIONS 1,490 398 415 1,075 28% TRAVEL 2,000 - - 2,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 13,004 4,037 3,798 9,206 29% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 500 - - 500 0% MISCELLANEOUS 9,500 2,988 3,446 6,054 36% $ 618,232 $ 179,612 $ 181,514 $ 436,718 29% DEVELO PMIIVT SERVIC ES/PLANNING SALARIES $ 1,665,849 $ 476,471 $ 528,915 $ 1,136,934 32% OVERTIME 1,300 7,096 4,270 (2,970) 328% BENEFITS 609,831 180,193 205,256 404,575 34% UNIFORMS 500 - - 500 0% SUPPLIES 17,100 3,575 2,575 14,525 15% SMALL EQUIPMENT 6,100 842 - 6,100 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 907,046 83,508 121,131 785,915 13% COMMUNICATIONS 9,000 2,791 2,234 6,766 25% TRAVEL 5,500 1,883 3,833 1,667 70% RENTAL/LEASE 143,236 51,765 47,413 95,823 33% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 6,800 - 596 6,204 9% MISCELLANEOUS 54,060 9,614 8,472 45,588 16% $ 3,426,322 $ 817,737 $ 924,696 $ 2,501,626 27% ENGINEERING SALARIES $ 1,720,176 $ 436,859 $ 552,503 $ 1,167,673 32% OVERTIME 8,300 3,602 2,489 5,811 30% BENEFITS 678,356 181,908 231,905 446,451 34% UNIFORMS 450 - - 450 0% SMALL EQUIPMENT 2,200 - - 2,200 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 53,840 8,531 500 53,340 1% COMMUNICATIONS 16,625 4,291 4,193 12,432 25% TRAVEL 600 89 585 15 98% RENTAL/LEASE 123,023 39,603 40,529 82,494 33% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 2,600 - - 2,600 0% MISCELLANEOUS 79,450 5,143 8,266 71,184 10% $ 2,685,620 $ 680,024 $ 840,970 $ 1,844,650 31% Q 1$ Packet Pg. 205 Page 4 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARINNffiVT IN DETAIL, 2019 Amended 4/30/2018 4/30/2019 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PARKS & REC REATIO N SALARIES $ 2,096,118 $ 595,044 $ 633,379 $ 1,462,739 30% OVERTIME 10,000 2,114 6,801 3,199 68% BENEFITS 785,394 234,157 249,000 536,394 32% UNIFORMS 6,275 1,417 3,845 2,430 61% SUPPLIES 121,590 43,275 33,063 88,527 27% SMALL EQUIPMENT 8,500 1,569 606 7,894 7% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 671,920 75,263 82,823 589,097 12% COMMUNICATIONS 30,320 2,477 2,674 27,646 9% TRAVEL 5,070 69 2,101 2,969 41% RENTAL/LEASE 268,539 83,980 96,096 172,443 36% PUBLIC UTILITY 175,338 45,028 50,315 125,023 29% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 29,700 882 13,054 16,646 44% MISCELLANEOUS 94,610 30,631 36,180 58,430 38% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 43,872 0% $ 4,303,374 $ 1,159,777 $ 1,209,937 $ 3,093,437 28% PUBLIC WORKS SALARIES $ 369,334 $ 92,001 $ 94,154 $ 275,180 25% OVERTIME 200 - 144 56 72% BENEFITS 129,196 33,957 34,000 95,196 26% SUPPLIES 8,600 1,145 1,485 7,115 17% SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,000 - - 1,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 200 30 27 173 14% COMMUNICATIONS 1,350 221 229 1,121 17% TRAVEL 500 - 745 (245) 149% RENTAL/LEASE 91,193 40,392 29,972 61,221 33% PUBLIC UTILITY 3,007 913 1,047 1,960 35% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 1,000 - - 1,000 0% MISCELLANEOUS 4,900 4,900 0% $ 610,480 $ 168,659 $ 161,804 $ 448,676 27% FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SALARIES 754,619 240,975 254,880 499,739 34% OVERTIME 7,500 2,250 3,546 3,954 47% BENEFITS 310,160 102,409 114,063 196,097 37% UNIFORMS 3,000 3,241 3,257 (257) 109% SUPPLIES 87,000 28,059 48,090 38,910 55% SMALL EQUIPMENT 3,000 1,249 1,801 1,199 60% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 940,940 2,608 57,731 883,209 6% COMMUNICATIONS 16,000 5,662 7,435 8,565 46% TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 59,730 21,162 18,243 41,487 31% PUBLIC UTILITY 282,280 106,593 111,626 170,654 40% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 444,500 44,377 145,145 299,355 33% MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 30 2,206 2,794 44% $ 2,914,729 $ 558,614 $ 768,024 $ 2,146,705 26% TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $ 45,296,523 $ 13,366,102 $ 13,957,552 $ 31,338,971 31% Q 16 Packet Pg. 206 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund 2019 General Fund Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 2,054,678 $ 2,054,678 $ 2,397,678 16.69% February 4,942,857 2,888,179 4,685,465 -5.21% March 7,411,396 2,468,539 7,046,230 -4.93% April 10,819,777 3,408,381 10,236,291 -5.39% May 18,632,994 7,813,217 June 20,936,841 2,303,847 July 23,072,511 2,135,670 August 25,590,721 2,518,210 September 27,737,323 2,146,602 October 30,605,048 2,867,725 November 38,576,248 7,971,200 December 40,866,194 2,289,946 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Estate Excise Tax 2019 Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 239,174 $ 239,174 $ 206,702 -13.58% February 426,584 187,410 316,468 -25.81% March 648,598 222,013 530,155 -18.26% April 866,924 218,326 723,280 -16.57% May 1,118,366 251,442 June 1,392,391 274,025 July 1,790,060 397,669 August 2,111,970 321,910 September 2,410,481 298,511 October 2,651,152 240,672 November 2,897,726 246,573 December 3,080,000 182,274 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 17 Packet Pg. 207 SALES TAX SUMMARY I 2.6.a I Accommodation, $11,460 Clothing and Accessories, $92,399 Communications, $75,607 Sales Tax Analysis By Category Current Period: April 2019 Year -to -Date Total $2,636,953 Automotive Repair, Health &Personal Care, $61,162 $87,601 Amusement & Construction Trade, Recreation, $28,813 $472,341 Business Services, $249,244 Gasoline, $11,093 Retail Food Stores, $98,766 Wholesale Trade,- $52,830 Misc Retail, $422,873 L Retail Automotive, $582,187 IManufacturing, $29,673 Others, $40,393 Eating & Drinking, $320,511 Annual Sales Tax Revenue 10,000,000 8,000,000 $7,395,114 $8,406,296 $5,840,764 $6,741,838 $6,905,122 6,000,000 4,000,000 $2,636,953 2,000, 000 L4 C 2014 2015 2016 2018 YTD 2019 18 Packet Pg. 208 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Sales and Use Tax 2019 Sales and Use Tax Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 583,740 $ 583,740 $ 665,493 14.01% February 1,326,812 743,072 1,464,443 10.37% March 1,890,823 564,012 2,088,425 10.45% April 2,418,442 527,618 2,636,953 9.04% May 3,087,512 669,070 June 3,695,140 607,628 July 4,344,323 649,183 August 5,056,215 711,892 September 5,734,922 678,707 October 6,438,793 703,871 November 7,175,252 736,459 December 7,825,000 649,748 City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Gas Utility Tax 2019 Gas Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 92,468 $ 92,468 $ 67,644 -26.85% February 188,382 95,914 140,257 -25.55% March 270,480 82,098 229,186 -15.27% April 338,414 67,935 300,757 -11.13% May 391,853 53,439 June 429,417 37,564 July 458,287 28,870 August 482,130 23,843 September 504,337 22,207 October 530,073 25,736 November 567,790 37,717 December 626,600 58,810 Gas Utility Tax 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 19 Packet Pg. 209 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Telephone Utility Tax 2019 Telephone Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 90,093 $ 90,093 $ 83,102 -7.76% February 180,099 90,007 153,757 -14.63% March 261,769 81,670 220,849 -15.63% April 347,309 85,539 292,121 -15.89% May 425,673 78,364 June 504,828 79,155 July 580,361 7S,533 August 657,995 77,634 September 738,345 80,350 October 815,639 77,294 November 889,278 73,638 December 967,200 77,922 Electric Utility Tax Telephone Utility Tax 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC � Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Electric Utility Tax 2019 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 180,392 $ 180,392 $ 171,454 -4.96% February 374,176 193,784 364,048 -2.71% March 542,795 168,619 526,085 -3.08% April 717,960 175,165 720,176 0.31% May 863,822 145,862 June 985,603 121,781 July 1,101,208 11S,604 August 1,212,283 111,075 September 1,323,362 111,080 October 1,439,932 116,570 November 1,562,550 122,618 December 1,691,300 128,750 Electric Utility Tax 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -0-- Current Year Budget - Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. ZD Packet Pg. 210 l 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Meter Water Sales 2019 Meter Water Sales Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 742,059 $ 742,059 $ 725,472 -2.24% February 1,256,325 514,266 1,233,174 -1.84% March 1,990,166 733,842 1,973,669 -0.83% April 2,476,952 486,786 2,430,513 -1.87% May 3,203,262 726,310 June 3,766,233 562,971 July 4,657,894 891,661 August 5,440,698 782,804 September 6,513,015 1,072,317 October 7,251,320 738,305 November 8,101,309 849,989 December 8,624,564 523,255 Storm Water Sales Meter Water Sales 7,000,000 6,000,000 14,000,000 1,000,000 0 , JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --*—CurrentYear Budget — — Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Storm Water Sales 2019 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 322,033 $ 322,033 $ 317,727 -4.96% February 1,017,422 695,389 1,006,134 -2.71% March 1,338,925 321,503 1,323,366 -3.08% April 1,623,949 285,024 1,605,082 0.31% May 1,945,558 321,609 June 2,231,420 285,862 July 2,553,731 322,311 August 3,249,585 695,854 September 3,570,469 320,884 October 3,855,506 285,037 November 4,177,408 321,902 December 4,462,767 285,359 Storm Water Sales 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC —*-- Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 21 Packet Pg. 211 I 2.6.a I City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary-Unmeter Sewer Sales 2019 Unmeter Sewer Sales Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 764,057 $ 764,057 $ 766,027 0.26% February 1,382,019 617,962 1,384,500 0.18% March 2,141,223 759,204 2,149,907 0.41% April 2,762,974 621,752 2,770,969 0.29% May 3,530,212 767,237 June 4,158,923 628,711 July 4,943,476 784,553 August 5,570,113 626,637 September 6,371,750 801,637 October 7,005,968 634,218 November 7,783,039 777,071 December 8,408,534 625,495 Umneter Sewer Sales 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --P-- Current Year Budget - Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 22 Packet Pg. 212 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -General Fund 2019 General Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 5,293,482 $ 5,293,482 $4,237,264-19.95% February 8,082,732 2,789,249 7,405,291 -8.38% March 11,556,438 3,473,706 10,663,247 -7.73% April 15,859,874 4,303,435 13,957,552-11.99% May 18,488,610 2,628,737 June 22,666,736 4,178,126 July 26,203,273 3,536,537 August 30,356,366 4,153,093 September 33,754,374 3,398,008 October 36,897,998 3,143,625 November 41,212,357 4,314,359 December 45,296,523 4,084,166 Non -Departmental General Fund 45,000,000 40,000,000 - v 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 p l JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Yeaz Budget �Prior Year City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Non -Departmental 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 2,586,468 $ 2,586,468 $ 1,939,971 -25.00% February 3,013,532 427,064 2,801,406 -7.04% March 4,041,004 1,027,471 3,658,670 -9.46% April 5,661,728 1,620,724 4,478,257 -20.90% May 5,936,842 275,114 June 7,529,862 1,593,020 July 8,430,518 900,656 August 9,710,604 1,280,086 September 10,511,285 800,681 October 11,101,008 589,723 November 12,475,676 1,374,668 December 13,556,979 1,081,303 Non -Departmental 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC �*— Current Year Budget —Rh— Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 23 Packet Pg. 213 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Council 2019 City Council Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 39,368 $ 39,368 $ 22,406 -43.09% February 80,151 40,783 46,519 -41.96% March 128,249 48,098 82,908 -35.35% April 174,054 45,804 112,983 -35.09% May 228,252 54,198 June 295,688 67,436 July 344,770 49,081 August 407,512 62,743 September 462,156 54,644 October 497,566 35,410 November 550,379 52,813 December 602,387 52,008 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Office of Mayor 2019 Office of Mayor Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 24,108 $ 24,108 $ 24,303 0.81% February 49,562 25,454 47,727 -3.70% March 73,857 24,295 72,221 -2.21% April 98,624 24,767 97,904 -0.73% May 122,830 24,206 June 146,929 24,099 July 171,908 24,979 August 197,139 25,231 September 221,850 24,711 October 246,137 24,287 November 270,260 24,123 December 296,155 25,895 Office of Mayor 300,000.00 250,000.00 200,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --0-CurrentYeaz Budget •PriorYeaz *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 24 Packet Pg. 214 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Human Resources 2019 Human Resources Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 46,632 $ 46,632 $ 48,901 4.87% February 97,790 51,158 81,030 -17.14% March 148,537 50,747 116,157 -21.80% April 189,740 41,203 156,727 -17.40% May 236,212 46,472 June 282,909 46,697 July 332,296 49,387 August 380,431 48,135 September 426,855 46,424 October 471,872 45,017 November 519,709 47,838 December 590,331 70,622 Municipal Court Human Resources 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAX JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --W-Current Yeaz Budget Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Municipal Court 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 87,580 $ 87,580 $ 70,858 -19.09% February 182,357 94,777 140,956 -22.70% March 280,184 97,826 219,779 -21.56% April 371,181 90,997 305,139 -17.79% May 465,663 94,482 June 556,434 90,771 July 647,960 91,526 August 746,132 98,173 September 839,518 93,386 October 939,927 100,409 November 1,035,295 95,368 December 1,143,210 107,915 Municipal Court 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -*--Current Year Budget �PriorYear *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 25 Packet Pg. 215 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Community Services/Economic Development 2019 Community Services/Economic Development Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 38,544 $ 38,544 $ 39,270 1.88% February 82,051 43,507 92,749 13.04% March 130,166 48,114 132,003 1.41% April 191,996 61,831 181,514 -5.46% May 233,127 41,130 June 277,966 44,839 July 323,762 45,796 August 379,014 55,252 September 428,169 49,155 October 483,157 54,989 November 542,833 59,676 December 618,232 75,399 City Clerk Community Services/Economic Development 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget -0-- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Clerk 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 64,593 $ 64,593 $ 70,355 8.92% February 120,556 55,963 128,177 6.32% March 176,231 55,674 178,301 1.17% April 234,202 57,971 243,367 3.91% May 289,750 55,548 June 341,414 51,664 July 396,840 55,427 August 457,532 60,692 September 509,418 51,886 October 566,970 57,551 November 625,898 58,928 December 685,420 59,522 City Clerk 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 26 Packet Pg. 216 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Technology Rental Fund 2019 Technology Rental Fund Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 119,026 $ 119,026 $ 157,010 31.91% February 251,357 132,331 215,707 -14.18% March 324,740 73,383 320,177 -1.41% April 392,021 67,281 370,014 -5.61% May 467,013 74,992 June 544,834 77,821 July 636,126 91,293 August 741,673 105,546 September 844,676 103,003 October 920,609 75,933 November 998,506 77,896 December 1,179,911 181,405 Finance Technology Rental Fund 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC � Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Finance 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 137,055 $ 137,055 $ 128,270 -6.41% February 232,763 95,708 224,119 -3.71% March 329,813 97,051 319,388 -3.16% April 427,554 97,741 418,398 -2.14% May 526,278 98,724 June 622,509 96,231 July 720,263 97,754 August 819,641 99,378 September 931,887 112,246 October 1,040,480 108,592 November 1,141,414 100,935 December 1,244,805 103,391 Finance 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC +Current Yeaz Budget -qw- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 27 Packet Pg. 217 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Attorney 2019 City Attorney Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 74,130 $ 74,130 $ 47,964 -35.30% February 148,260 74,130 126,678 -14.56% March 222,390 74,130 222,683 0.13% April 296,520 74,130 294,517 -0.68% May 370,650 74,130 June 444,780 74,130 July 518,910 74,130 August 593,040 74,130 September 667,170 74,130 October 741,300 74,130 November 815,430 74,130 December 889,560 74,130 Police City Attorney 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -*-- Current Year Budget � Prior Year City of*Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Police 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 920,277 $ 920,277 $ 927,983 0.84% February 1,860,808 940,531 1,815,042 -2.46% March 2,787,770 926,962 2,786,780 -0.04% April 3,724,324 936,554 3,763,317 1.05% May 4,658,355 934,031 June 5,621,223 962,868 July 6,560,289 939,066 August 7,489,793 929,504 September 8,432,902 943,109 October 9,480,410 1,047,508 November 10,742,210 1,261,800 December 11,728,919 986,709 Police 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget �PriorYear *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. Z$ Packet Pg. 218 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Development Services 2019 Development Services Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 233,684 $ 233,684 $ 212,448 -9.09% February 495,741 262,057 434,026 -12.45% March 764,561 268,821 663,134 -13.27% April 1,032,480 267,919 924,696 -10.44% May 1,323,208 290,728 June 1,594,826 271,617 July 1,875,116 280,290 August 2,181,101 305,985 September 2,471,090 289,989 October 2,769,197 298,107 November 3,083,430 314,232 December 3,426,322 342,892 Parks & Recreation Development Services 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --0- Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Parks & Recreation 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 290,564 $ 290,564 $ 280,923 -3.32% February 589,424 298,861 588,578 -0.14% March 908,094 318,670 888,876 -2.12% April 1,234,622 326,528 1,209,937 -2.00% May 1,579,091 344,468 June 1,921,011 341,920 July 2,365,248 444,238 August 2,891,636 526,388 September 3,284,546 392,910 October 3,627,539 342,993 November 3,925,800 298,261 December 4,303,374 377,574 Parks & Recreation 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC +Current Yeaz Budget -d-- Prior Yeaz *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 29 Packet Pg. 219 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Public Works 2019 Public Works Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 50,384 $ 50,384 $ 39,815 -20.98% February 102,273 51,889 80,023 -21.76% March 153,446 51,173 120,273 -21.62% April 204,598 51,153 161,804 -20.92% May 255,170 50,572 June 306,227 51,057 July 357,744 51,517 August 407,869 50,125 September 456,744 48,874 October 506,690 49,946 November 556,681 49,991 December 610,480 53,799 Facilities Maintenance Public Works 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 i 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC � Current Yeaz Budget -0-- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Facilities Maintenance 2019 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 228,301 $ 228,301 $ 172,786 -24.32% February 457,666 229,364 382,230 -16.48% March 700,969 243,303 576,136 -17.81% April 931,712 230,743 768,024 -17.57% May 1,165,903 234,191 June 1,378,275 212,372 July 1,646,299 268,024 August 1,872,892 226,592 September 2,123,872 250,981 October 2,374,954 251,082 November 2,628,848 253,894 December 2,914,729 285,881 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 30 Packet Pg. 220 I 2.6.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Engineering 2019 Engineering Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 199,012 $ 199,012 $ 211,009 6.03% February 397,302 198,290 416,031 4.71% March 613,115 215,813 625,938 2.09% April 835,389 222,274 840,970 0.67% May 1,053,506 218,118 June 1,284,814 231,308 July 1,508,283 223,469 August 1,747,325 239,041 September 1,974,318 226,993 October 2,206,759 232,441 November 2,431,557 224,798 December 2,685,620 254,063 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 31 Packet Pg. 221 I 2.6.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY City of Edmonds Investment Portfolio Detail As of April 30, 2019 Years Agency/ Investment Purchase to Par Market Maturity Coupon Issuer Type Price Maturity Value Value Date Rate SCIP CD 2,500,000 0.10 2,500,000 2,500,000 06/04/19 2.65% FNMA Bonds 999,750 0.12 1,000,000 998,654 06/13/19 1.40% FHLB Bonds 1,000,400 0.14 1,000,000 998,606 06/20/19 1.40% FNMA Bonds 988,720 0.41 1,000,000 996,076 09/27/19 1.50% FHLMC Bonds 995,970 0.42 1,000,000 994,942 10/02/19 1.25% FNMA Bonds 1,994,310 0.50 2,000,000 1,989,058 10/28/19 1.35% FNMA Bonds 997,300 0.92 1,000,000 990,714 03/30/20 1.38% FHLB Bonds 2,003,780 0.92 2,000,000 1,981,482 03/30/20 1.45% FNMA Bonds 2,000,000 0.92 2,000,000 1,986,444 03/30/20 1.65% FHLMC Bonds 2,003,868 1.00 2,000,000 1,978,788 04/28/20 1.35% FNMA Bonds 1,000,000 1.17 1,000,000 988,635 06/30/20 1.38% FNMA Bonds 1,000,000 1.17 1,000,000 988,635 06/30/20 1.38% FHLB Bonds 3,000,000 1.21 3,000,000 2,957,637 07/13/20 1.20% RFCS Bonds 1,999,698 1.21 2,120,000 2,059,094 07/15/20 1.60% FHLB Bonds 2,000,000 1.25 2,000,000 1,983,868 07/30/20 1.75% FNMA Bonds 1,000,000 1.33 1,000,000 986,140 08/28/20 1.40% FNMA Bonds 1,000,000 1.33 1,000,000 986,140 08/28/20 1.40% FHLMC Bonds 999,500 1.67 1,000,000 989,141 12/30/20 1.75% FNMA Bonds 2,005,474 1.73 2,000,000 1,971,442 01/19/21 1.50% FM Bonds 2,000,000 1.92 2,000,000 1,981,076 04/01/21 1.87% First Financial CD 3,000,000 1.95 3,000,000 3,000,000 04/10/21 2.86% FHLB Bonds 2,000,000 2.15 2,000,000 1,991,058 06/22/21 2.18% FFCB Bonds 968,940 2.38 1,000,000 985,532 09/13/21 1.73% FHLMC Bonds 2,000,000 2.58 2,000,000 1,984,386 11/26/21 2.13% FHLMC Bonds 999,400 2.67 1,000,000 989,393 12/30/21 2.00% FHLMC Bonds 1,000,000 2.83 1,000,000 994,546 02/25/22 2.15% First Financial CD 2,803,516 4.55 2,803,516 2,803,516 11/15/23 2.10% TOTAL SECURITIES 44,260,627 1.43 44,423,516 44,055,003 Washington State Local Gov't Investment Pool TOTAL PORTFOLIO SCIP- CD,_ Issuer Diversification 6% Fi rst Financial - CD, 13% FNMA, 29% r4L RFCS, 5% FHLMC, FM, 5%-/ 18% FHLB, 23% mmmmmmj 16,250,877 16,250,877 Demand 2.54% $ 60,674,393 $ 60,305,881 Cash and Investment Balances (in $ Millions) Checking, Ik $1.6,3% State LGIP, $16.3, 26% Bonds, $36.1, 58% CD'S, $8.3, 13% 32 Packet Pg. 222 1 I 2.6.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY Annual Interest Income $1,000,000 917,754 $800,000 $653,690 $600,000 $400,000 6 $423,816 $418,873 335 92 $200,000 163 214 1:7 2017 2018 YTD 2019 Edmonds Rate of Return Compared to Benchmark (Rolling 12 months) - - - 6 Month Treasury Rate (Benchmark) City Blended Rate 2.8 2.5% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.3% - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.0% 1.8 1.5% 1.3% 1.0% 0.8% 0.5% 0.3% 0.0 May July September November January March Maturity Distribution and Rate of Return $12, 000,000 2.50% $10, 000,000 2.00% $8,000,000 1.50% $6,000,000 1.00% $4,000,000 $2,000,000 , 0.50% $- 0.00% 0-6 Mo 6-12 M o 12-18 M o 18-24 M o 24-30 M o 30-36 M o 36-42 M o 42-48 M o 48-54 M o 54-60 M o 33 Packet Pg. 223 2.6.a GENERAL FUND OVERVIEW FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES GENERAL FUND & SUBFUNDS ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2018 3/31 /2019 4/30/2019 Q1 YTD _ 0 0 001-General Fund $ 11,233,277 $ 7,364,212 $ 7,512,017 $ (3,617,016) $ (3,721,261 009-Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 333,447 214,379 174,757 (119,069) (158,69, 011-Risk Management Fund 929,908 926,477 929,908 - - 012-ContingencyReserve Fund 5,564,260 5,466,190 5,564,260 - - 014-Historic Preservation Gift Fund 12,607 7,055 7,074 (5,533) (5,53: ii 016-Building Maintenance 210,221 210,221 210,221 - - c 017 - Marsh Restoration & Preservation 309,178 310,623 310,623 1,445 1,44,1 0 018 -Edmonds Homelessness Response 225,443 223,581 223,581 (1,862) (1,86. 019 - Edmonds Opioid Response 250,000 250,000 250,000 - - N Total General Fund & Subfunds $ 19,068,342 $ 14,972,738 $ 15,182,441 $ (3,742,035) $ (3,885,90- Q J *$2,000,000 of the General Fund Balance has been assigned by management for the development of Civic Field. a- t r 3 0 a m General Fund & Subfunds 18 c ii 15 2' t 12 ■ General Fund o $17.07 & Subfunds a o_ 9 $12.97 $13.18 ■ Civic Field c = 6 N L I Q 3 $2.00 �Q ` $2.00 m - E Dec2018 Mar2019 Apr2019 M Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2019 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. 34 Packet Pg. 224 2.6.a GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND FUND BALANCES BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- FUNDS 12/31 /2018 3/31 /2019 4/30/2019 Q1 YTD General Fund & Subfunds $ 19,068,342 $ 14,972,738 $ 15,182,441 $ (3,742,035) $ (3,885,90, Special Revenue 9,524,484 10,905,058 10,297,936 852,053 773,45, a Debt Service 12 4,481 18,744 6,169 18,73, Capital Projects 2,209,541 2,232,147 2,237,232 26,906 27,69' Total Governmental Funds $ 30,802,378 $ 28,114,424 $ 27,736,352 $ (2,856,907) $ (3,066,02f coo c ii t .r c O 2 CD 0 N Governmental Fund Balances -By Fund Group Governmental Fund Balances - Q. Combined Q 20 $19.07 16 $14.97 $15.18 12 c 0 8 General Fund & Subfunds Special Revenue $1D.91 $10.30 9.52 Debt Service 4 iE$2.2t $2.23 $2.24 $0.00 $0.00 $0.02 Dec2018 Mar2019 Apr2019 Capital Projects 32 28 24 20 C 0 2 16 12 8 4 Dec2018 Mar2019 Apr2019 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2019 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. 35 Packet Pg. 225 1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS OVERVIEW I 2.6.a I GOVERNMENTAL SPECIAL REVENUE 104 - Drug Enforcement Fund 111 - Street Fund 112 - Combined Street Const/Improve 117 - Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 118 - Memorial Street Tree 120 - Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 121 -Employee Parking Permit Fund 122 - Youth Scholarship Fund 123 -Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 125 - Real Estate Tax 2 * 126 - Real Estate Excise Tax 1 127 - Gifts Catalog Fund 130 - Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement 136 - Parks Trust Fund 137 - Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund 138 - Sister City Commission 140 -Business Improvement Disrict Total Special Revenue FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE; $ 0 $ (9,725) $ 6,531 $ 1,343,329 1,132,176 1,060,217 859,216 2,016,382 1,379,632 570,634 576,596 578,707 18,898 18,972 19,121 89,937 90,261 87,671 77,046 86,178 87,743 15,030 13,845 13,821 70,586 76,640 74,695 2,230,820 2,326,915 2,331,795 2,562,524 2,814,360 2,872,404 295,225 352,436 356,445 212,775 208,783 207,856 160,606 158,756 160,012 985,656 993,557 1,002,740 8,102 7,779 7,837 24,099 41,149 50,708 $ 9,524,484 $ 10,905,058 $ 10,297,936 $ ACTUAL 3,262 $ (207,186) 629,977 7,932 143 1,005 9,385 (1,126) 6,389 82,132 238,332 58,183 (3,301) (1,258) 11,433 (297) 17,050 6,53' (283,11, 520,41( ., 8,07: p 22, m (2,26( 10,69E (1,20f 4,1 M LL 100,97( >, 309,88( c 61,22( 0 (4,914 2 (59! o 17,08: N (26` a 26.6M Q 852,053 $ 773,45, *$200,000 of the fund balance in Fund 125 has been reserved for Marsh Restoration Funding Special Revenue Funds 12 10 8 6 ■ Special $10.91 $10.30 Revenue $9.52 4 2 Dec2018 Mar2019 Apr2019 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2019 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. 36 Packet Pg. 226 ENTERPRISE FUNDS OVERVIEW I 2.6.a I ENTERPRISE FUNDS 421 -Water Utility Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund 423 - Sewer/WWTP Utility Fund 424 - Bond Reserve Fund 411 -Combined Utility Operation Total Enterprise Funds FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- $ 21,205,815 $ 17,473,798 $ 21,374,045 $ 11,913,623 11,829,589 12,728,193 45,890,098 45,779,494 47,993,651 843,960 843,971 843,964 - 187,019 49,848 $ 79,853,496 $ 76,113,870 $ 82,989,701 $ CHANGE IN FUND ---- ACTUAL ---- 526,966 $ 932,297 1,840,287 3 39,011 3,338,565 $ *$250,000 of the Storm Utility Fund Balance has been reserved for Marsh Restoration Funding Enterprise and Agency Fund Balances as of April 30, 2019 50,000,000 45,000,000 40,000,000 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000, 000 $49,848 0 Combined Utility $47,993,651 168,23( 814,57( 2,103,55. 0 m 49,841 c� 3,136,20! 0 c ii t c 0 as 0 N Q Q $21,374,045 $12,728,193 $843,964 $193,264 Water Storm Sewer/WWTP Bond Reserve Firemen's Pension Fund *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2019 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. 37 Packet Pg. 227 SUMMARY OVERVIEW I 2.6.a I FUND BALANCES CITY-WIDE ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2018 3/31 /2019 4/30/2019 Governmental Funds $ 30,802,379 $ 28,114,424 $ 27,736,352 $ Enterprise Funds 79,853,496 76,113,870 82,989,701 Internal Services Fund 10,175,941 9,993,633 10,092,033 Agency Funds 217,698 198,816 193,264 Total City-wide Total $121,049,514 $114,420,743 $121,011,350 $ CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL Q1 ---- YTD (2,856,907) $ (3,066,02i 3,338,565 3,136,201, 65,963 (83,90f Q. (18,882) N (24,43: W 528,738 $ (38,16: 2 c c ii t .r c 0 Governmental Fund Balances (Excluding General Fund) as of April 30, 2019 2 Drug Enforcement Fund Street Fund Combined Street Const/Improve Fund Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund Memorial Street Fund Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund Employee Parking Permit Fund Youth Scholarship Fund Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts Real Estate Excise Tax 2 Real Estate Excise Tax 1, Parks Acq Gifts Catalog Fund Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Parks Trust Fund Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund Sister City Commission Business Improvement District L.I.D. Fund Control Parks Capital Construction Fund $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2019 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. as T Q N 0. 38 Packet Pg. 228 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS OVERVIEW I 2.6.a I I INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 511 -Equipment Rental Fund 512 -Technology Rental Fund Total Internal Service Funds 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000, 000 6,000, 000 4,000, 000 2,000, 000 FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2018 3/31 /2019 4/30/2019 $ 9,552,483 $ 9,699,333 $ 9,470,270 $ 623,458 294,300 621,763 $ 10,175,941 $ 9,993,633 $ 10,092,033 1 $ Internal Service Fund Balances $9,552,483 $9,699,333 $9,470,270 Dec 2018 Mar2019 Apr2019 CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES :r ---- ACTUAL ---- 0 a Q1 aD YTD 110,162 $ (82,21: (44,199) (1,69f 65,963 $ (83,90! r C0 G r Q N Q a ■ 511-Equipment Rental Fund ■ 512-Technology Rental Fund *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2018 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2018 Financial Statements. 39 Packet Pg. 229 2.6.a GENERAL FUND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE 2015 2016 2017 2018* 2019 (Jan - April) Beginning Fund Balance 6,446,380 9,359,435 9,841,718 10,273,343 11,233,278 Revenue Taxes 28,714,539 29,403,794 29,572,203 30,755,578 6,616,478 Licenses and permits 2,132,897 2,269,313 2,506,800 2,401,855 757,721 Intergovernmental 977,585 1,261,998 890,572 1,014,434 265,759 Charges for services 5,150,816 5,403,786 5,463,913 5,810,961 2,175,214 Fines and forfeitures 535,078 522,051 459,929 616,783 189,163 Investment earnings 70,045 (26,712) 154,739 273,226 131,481 Miscellaneous 435,414 441,432 471,675 931,495 100,476 Transfers in 822,175 82,695 26,300 75,884 - Debt proceeds - 549,095 - - - Sale of capital assets - 58,451 7,143 5,273 - Insurance recoveries - - - 15,570 - Total Revenue 38,838,549 39,965,902 39,553,274 41,901,058 10,236,291 Expenditures General government 8,836,333 9,969,187 9,714,867 10,288,694 4,041,063 Public safety 19,371,912 20,128,896 22,228,871 22,585,212 8,044,750 Transportation 3,600 3,600 3,600 4,779 2,088 Economic environment 1,353,548 1,313,430 1,551,152 1,460,763 501,147 Mental and physical health 69,762 70,814 126,791 178,859 83,541 Culture and recreation 3,591,029 3,773,633 3,959,731 4,331,806 1,284,963 Debt service 272,793 196,663 198,361 197,694 - Capital outlay 92,202 56,662 90,573 93,105 - Transfers out 2,334,315 3,414,141 1,247,703 1,800,212 - Debt refunding - 556,593 - - - Total Expenditures 35,925,494 39,483,619 39,121,649 40,941,124 13,957,552 Prior Period Adjustments - - - - Change in position 2,913,055 482,283 431,625 959,934 (3,721,260) Ending Fund Balance 9,359,435 9,841,718 10,273,343 11,233,278 7,512,018 *Preliminary R:\Finance Committee\2019\Jan-April P&L 6/5/2019 Packet Pg. 230 3.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Indigenous Peoples Land Acknowledgment for Public Meetings Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Development Services Preparer: Diane Cunningham Background/History The City Council has been requested to consider having a statement at the beginning of Council meetings to acknowledge that the land that is now part of the City of Edmonds is also the land of the Salish people, who have inhabited it since long before 19th-century settlers arrived. This request was followed by several Council members expressing their interest in the issue. Council President Fraley- Monillas also consulted with City staff and asked for more information to be brought to the City Council for consideration. Staff Recommendation Forward this topic for discussion by the City Council at a public meeting following consultation with a tribal representative Narrative Acknowledgment of the traditional Native inhabitants of land is a practice encouraged by various organizations, including the U.S. Department of Arts and Culture. (USDAC is a nonprofit organization, not a federal agency.) The practice is starting to take hold in some U.S., Canadian, New Zealand, and Australian locations. For example, the Edmonds Center for the Arts has the following statement read at the beginning of presented events: "I want to start by expressing our gratitude to be hosting this event on the culture -rich indigenous lands of the Coast Salish people. We are committed to working with local tribes to acknowledge their ancestral lands and are honored to do so this evening." Below are several questions and responses about land acknowledgment. Some of them are largely adapted from sources identified in materials that are attached to this memo. (See attachment.) What is land acknowledgment? According to a Canadian students' research group: "A Land Acknowledgment is a formal statement that recognizes the unique and enduring relationship that exists between Indigenous Peoples and their traditional territories." Why acknowledge Native inhabitants of a land area? The USDAC states that acknowledgement is a way of showing respect and correcting the perception that Native peoples are gone from the land or that they have little to offer today's communities. Who are the Native peoples of the Edmonds area? Packet Pg. 231 3.1 In and around modern-day Edmonds, Native peoples include: the Tulalip Tribes, the Snohomish Tribe, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, the Suquamish Tribe, and the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians. All of these are considered to be Coast Salish people. What about all the other people who lived here --for example, Africans brought to this continent against their will, Latinos who were displaced in areas of North America, Japanese -Americans who lost their homes and businesses during the World War II era, and communities of color that have lost their neighborhoods due to gentrification? Shouldn't we acknowledge them too? The USCAC's guide to honoring Native land responds with this: "(f)or more than five hundred years, Native communities across the Americas have demonstrated resilience and resistance in the face of violent efforts to separate them from their land, culture, and each other. " This approach recognizes the especially long-term nature of Native connection to ancestral land. It does not mean that other groups have not been impacted by people of European descent, but that the roots of Native peoples on this land go far back into prehistory and that Euro- American appropriation has been particularly widespread, long-lasting, and significant here. Another approach is to make two statements, first to specifically acknowledge the tribe or indigenous nation that has ancestral ties to the land and a second statement to broadly acknowledge the many people who have been here and were subject to painful losses and discrimination. However, this approach could be viewed as diluting the original idea. A variation on the second approach is to use the Native Land Acknowledgment on a regular basis but, from time to time, do other things to recognize the losses experienced by other people who have been marginalized or oppressed in our society. Do other City Councils in our region make a land acknowledgment part of their public meetings? An informal survey of City Council practices in our region has indicated that no city governments currently make acknowledgment a regular part of their public meetings. What acknowledgment statements do other organizations make? Here are some examples: "I would like to begin by acknowledging that we gather today on the ancestral homelands of the Coast Salish Peoples, who lived in the Salish Sea basin, throughout the San Juan Islands and the North Cascades watershed, from time immemorial. Please join me in expressing our deepest respect and gratitude for our indigenous neighbors, the Lummi Nation and Nooksack Tribe, for their enduring care and protection of our shared lands and waterways." (Western Washington University, which tailors the statement to reflect the specific location in which an official university event is being held) "The human story of the North Cascades begins with the original stewards of these lands and watersheds, the Indigenous Nations and their modern descendants.... We offer this acknowledgement as a first step in honoring their relationship with land we share, and a call towards further learning and action, not in place of the authentic relationships with local Indigenous communities, but rather to assist in giving them voice." (North Cascades Institute from its website) "We at Seattle Mennonite church acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestral lands of the Duwamish people. A people that are still here, continuing to honor and bring to light their ancient heritage." (Stated in large letters on the exterior wall of the Seattle Mennonite Church) Packet Pg. 232 3.1 "I want to start by expressing our gratitude to be hosting this event on the culture -rich indigenous lands of the Coast Salish people. We are committed to working with local tribes to acknowledge their ancestral lands and are honored to do so this evening." (Edmonds Center for the Arts, as read at special events the ECA sponsors) Should the City contact a tribal representative before deciding on language for a statement? While not required, this is a good idea. It respects the people whom the statement is about. That is why representatives from the Edmonds Center the Arts reached out to a Tulalip representative before settling on language for their land acknowledgment. What language might the Council propose for land acknowledgment? The City Council could choose (or propose) a version of one of the ideas below -or develop something entirely new. "We would like to open this meeting with an acknowledgment that we are on the traditional lands of the Coast Salish people." "We are committed to working with local tribes to acknowledge their ancestral lands and are honored to do so this evening." (This is excerpted from the ECA's land acknowledgment.) "We are on the traditional homelands to the Coast Salish Tribes. We pay our respect to elders past and present." (This was suggested in a public comment at the April 16, 2019 City Council meeting.) What are oational methods the Citv of Edmonds could use to make acknowledgment? Two possible alternatives -but certainly not the only ones --are: Reading a statement at the beginning of Council meetings (which could be done by the Mayor or Council President) Having a statement prominently printed on Council meeting agendas, for example just under the letterhead. If the City Council includes a land acknowledgment as part of its regular meetings, would all other City boards and commissions have to do so? No, they would not be required unless the Council adopts a code provision that makes this a requirement. Regardless, boards and commissions could be encouraged to take this step. We understand that the City of Edmonds Diversity Commission already is voluntarily planning to acknowledge Native inhabitants and lands at future Commission meetings. Could the City be sued for making a land acknowledgment that speaks only of Native inhabitants (and not other groups)? A City could be sued for almost anything but that doesn't mean the suit would have merit. If this issue is a Council concern, it can be addressed by the City Attorney. Has the City of Edmonds Diversity Commission weighed in on this issue? The Diversity Commission discussed land acknowledgment at its June S, 2019 meeting. Is acknowledgement the end of the story? If land acknowledgment is practiced, it may be useful as a way of raising awareness for local community members and of strengthening relationships with tribes. However, it is not a substitute for other actions. Packet Pg. 233 3.1 Does the City of Edmonds currently do anything to recognize Native tribes and their interests? Below are examples of the City's current practices to recognize the interests of Native tribes: Notification of City projects and programs under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Outreach to tribal representatives on major studies (for example, regarding the Marsh) Consideration of comments from tribal representatives Participation with tribal representatives on various regional boards and committees What are the next steps regarding land acknowledgment? Next steps could include: Outreach to Tulalip representative Meeting of full City Council to discuss language and method of use (tentatively scheduled for June 25) Council vote on motion (or Resolution) for Land Acknowledgment Action, as needed, to implement City Council's vote. Attachments: Resources.lnfo Packet Pg. 234 3.1.a HONOR NATIVE LAND: A GUIDE AND CALL TO 0 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Marchers at Standing Rock 2016; Photo by Nicholas Ward We call on all individuals and organizations to open all public events and gatherings with acknowledgment of the traditional Native inhabitants of the land. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOG�USDAC.US Packet Pg. 235 3.1.a U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND CULTURE HELLOpUSDAC.US I USDAC.US Dear Citizen Artist, We launch this guide in the lead -up to Indigenous People's Day 2017, when each of us is free to choose whether to accept and perpetuate a distorted history or stand for truth and reconciliati-on grounded in acknowledgment. The time is long overdue for everyone to open all public events and gatherings with acknowledgment of the traditional Native inhabitants of the land. Please help to spread this guide, encouraging your colleagues, neighbors, officials, and institutions to adopt this practice as well. The U.S. Department of Arts and Culture is a people -powered department, a grassroots action network inciting creativity and social imagination to shape a culture of empathy, equity, and belonging. We are grateful to all of the partners whose work inspired this guide. Special thanks to the following individuals who offered insight and support in its creation: T. Lulani Arquette (Native Hawaiian), Daniel Banks, Sherry Salway Black (Oglala Lakota), Lori Pourier (Oglala Lakota), Shirley Sneve (Rosebud Sioux), Rulan Tangen (mixed Indigenous heritage), Josh Reid (Snohomish), Tanaya Winder (Duckwater Shoshone/ Pyramid Lake Paiute/Southern Ute) and Larissa FastHorse (Sicangu Nation Lakota) and Ty Defoe (Ojibwe/Oneida) of Indigenous Direction. Thank you to Nicholas Ward, Connie Fitzpatrick, and the Native Arts and Cultures Foundation for use of their photographs, and Keith BraveHeart (Oceti Sakowin: Oglala Lakota), Bunky Echo -Hawk (Pawn ee/Yakama), Marlena Myles (Spirit Lake Dakota), Bryan D. Parker (Muscogee Creek/Choctaw/White Mountain Apache), Remy (Dine), and William Wilson (Dine) for the use of their artwork. Any omissions or errors are the responsibility of the USDAC. Please feel free to be in touch: helloousdac.us. With gratitude, The Z/6D/ 4C TOGETHER, WE CREATE. I Packet Pg. 236 3.1.a TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................2 WHAT IS LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT?...........................................................................3 WHY INTRODUCE THE PRACTICE OF LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT?; A FEW DISCLAIMERS ABOUT ACKNOWLEDGMENT HOWTO ACKNOWLEDGE.................................................................................................5 STEP ONE: IDENTIFY; STEP TWO: ARTICULATE; STEP THREE: DELIVER BEYOND ACKNOWLEDGMENT........................................................................................9 LEARN MORE; BUILD RELATIONSHIPS AND TAKE ACTION; DOWNLOAD ART OR MAKE YOUR OWN!; SPREAD THE WORD; ABOUT THE USDAC; BE IN TOUCH "Before Here Was Here" by Bunky Echo -Hawk (Pawnee/Yakama) TOGETHER, WE CREATE. Q USDAC.US I HELLOO, USDAC.US PAGE 1 Packet Pg. 237 3.1.a INTRODUCTION We were a people before "We the People." Jefferson Keel (Chickasaw). 20th President of the National Congress of American Indians, 2013 IN COUNTRIES SUCH AS NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, AND AMONG TRIBAL NATIONS IN THE U.S., it is co-nmomplace, even policy, to open events and gatherings by acknowledging the traditional Indigenous inhabitants of that land. While some individuals and cultural and educational institutions in the United States have adopted this custom, the vast majority have not. Together, we can spark a movement to make acknowledgment of traditional lands a regular practice at public and private events. Acknowledgment is a simple, powerful way of showing respect and a step toward correcting the stories and practices that erase Indigenous peoples history and culture and toward inviting and honoring the truth. Imagine this practice widely adopted: imagine cultural venues, classrooms, conference settings, places of worship, sports stadiums, and town halls, acknowledging traditional lands. Millions would be exposed -many for the first time -to the names of the traditional Indigenous inhabitants of the lands they are on, inspiring them to ongoing awareness and action. For more than five hundred years, Native communities across the Americas have demonstrated resilience and resistance in the face of violent efforts to separate them from their land, culture, and each other. They remain atthe forefront of movements to protect Mother Earth and the life the earth sustains. Today, corporate greed and federal policy push agendas to extract wealth from the earth, degrading sacred land in blatant disregard of treaty rights. Acknowledgment is a critical public intervention, a necessary step toward honoring Native communities and enacting the much larger project of decolonization and reconciliation. We call on all artists, cultural workers, public officials, educators, administrators, community leaders, organizers, and engaged community members to open all public events and gatherings with acknowledgment of the traditional Native inhabitants of the land. Photo courtesy of Native Arts and Cultures Foundation TOGETHER, WE CREATE. Q USDAC.US I HELLOG►USDAC.US PAGE 2 Packet Pg. 238 3.1.a p�,P aR rM�.y WHAT IS LAND p 000 .` ACKNOWLEDGMENT. s IDC'o. Acknowledgment by itself is a small gesture. It becomes meaningful when coupled with authentic rela l i�i II ai iu informed action. uu� a n5 beginningn Can i . c a—n -111. - IS r,rI-1. F-1. u� of Native sovereignty and cultural rights, a step toward equitable relationship and reconciliation. Join us in adopting, calling for, and spreading this practice Naming is an exercise in power. Who gets the right to name or be named? Whose stories are honored in a name? Whose are erased? Acknowledgment of traditional land is a public statement of the name of the traditional Native inhabitants of a place. It honors their historic relationship with the land. A Land Acknowledgment is a formal statement that recognizes the unique and enduring relationship that exists between Indigenous Peoples and their traditional territories. Laurier Students' Public Interest Research Group, Ontario, Canada http://www.Ispirg.org/knowthetand/ WHY INTRODUCE THE PRACTICE OF LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT? Photo by Nicholas Ward • Offer recognition and respect. • Counter the "doctrine of discovery" with the true story of the people who were already here. • Create a broader public awareness of the history that has led to this moment. • Begin to repair relationships with Native communities and with the land. • Support larger truth -telling and reconciliation efforts. • Remind people that colonization is an ongoing process, with Native lands still occupied due to deceptive and broken treaties and practices of eminent domain and other mechanisms intended to benefit government or corporate America. • Take a cue from Indigenous protocols, opening up spaces with reverence and respect. • Inspire ongoing action and relationships. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOOUSDAC.US PAGE 3 Packet Pg. 239 3.1.a Many countries are far ahead of the United States in adopting this practice. In Australia, New Zealand, and Canada there are protocols, maps, and pronunciation guides readily available. Many universities have made acknowledgment a policy, providing simple templates for students, staff, and faculty. Beginning in 2016, all Toronto public schools began opening their school days with a statement of acknowledgment. The University of Alberta offers this explanation of acknowledgment: To acknowledge the traditional territory is to recognize its longer history, reaching beyond colonization and the establishment of European colonies, as well as its significance for the Indigenous peoples who lived and continue to live upon this territory, and whose practices and spiritualities were tied to the land and continue to develop in relationship to the land and its other inhabitants today. Acknowledgment in these countries is a small part of a more significant commitment to truth and reconciliation —including official government apologies and truth commissions leading to significant public recommendations and reforms. In Australia, many formal events begin with a "Welcome to Country:' While a Land Acknowledgment can be offered by anyone hosting or leading an event, a Welcome to Country is offered by an Indigenous elder or community leader. The custom is to offer compensation for leading this more formal ceremonial welcome. A FEW DISCLAIMERS ABOUT ACKNOWLEDGMENT: • It's simple. And also not so simple. In some cases the traditional inhabitants of a place may be clear. In other cases whom to recognize is much less so. Do your research. While the act of naming traditional inhabitants may not take much time, moving into right relationship requires preparation. • This guide doesn't offer the one right way to acknowledge. What's offered here is not a comprehensive checklist or set of universally acceptable protocols. There are currently 567 federally recognized tribal nations, each with its own history and protocols for welcome and acknowledgment. There are also state - recognized tribes and peoples, including Native Hawaiians who reside on six islands. There is no one way of doing this. • Acknowledgment is made meaningful through specific context and relationship. Whenever possible, the best entry point into the practice of acknowledgment is through relationship and dialogue with Native communities in the area. • The practice of formal welcome and acknowledgment of land is not new. Acknowledgment has long been practiced —typically in much more nuanced, formal, and ceremonial ways —within Indigenous communities. Many artists, activists, presenters, academics, and others have been starting events with acknowledgment for decades. By publishing this guide, we hope to draw on these histories to help spark a movement to make acknowledgment commonplace. • Acknowledgment is but a first step. It does not stand in for relationship and action, but can begin to point toward deeper possibilities for decolonizing relationships with people and place. map shows how that happened over time. Note that Alaska and Hawaii are not included. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLO@USDAC.US PAGE 4 Packet Pg. 240 3.1.a rrF , HOW TO ACKNOWLEDGe aw Below are suggested steps to acknowledging traditional land at the opening of a public gathering or event. The best way to root this practice in a local context is through dialogue with local Native groups. Not yet .having those relationships doesn't mean VOL! cant begin. STEP ONE: IDENTIFY The first step is identifying the traditional inhabitants of the lands you're on. This task may be complicated by multiple and contested histories of settlement, resettlement, and recognition. Many places are now home to Native people who have called that land home from time immemorial and also to those relocated from elsewhere. The goal of acknowledgment is recognizing and uplifting, not hurting or causing further division. So it is important to proceed with care, doing good research before making statements of acknowledgment. Here are some places you can look online: • Wikipedia entries on many cities document some history of Indigenous inhabitation. Be sure to cross- check what you find there with other sources. • This map of Native Land is one of the more comprehensive maps available: https://native-land.ca/ • The Native Languages site offers breakdown by state, with contact information for local tribes: http:// www.native-languages.org/ In addition to consulting local Native individuals and organizations, you can check to see if there are resources at local universities and colleges, especially those with American Indian/Native/Indigenous Studies centers, programs, and/or departments. If multiple tribal groups claim belonging to the land, consider not naming one particular group or naming all of them. Ideally, this decision should be made through dialogue with local Native elders and culture bearers, respecting their wishes about how they desire to be named. A DEEPER STEP: Identify Native elders and culture -bearers in your region to join in a conversation about how they would like to see this practice take shape locally, particularly how it could be of greatest benefit for their communities. You can use this guide as a jumping- off place for conversation. If you are part of an organization or group, consider offering an honorarium to those who take part in the dialogue. This dialogue could also be a public forum, engaging others who want to learn about this practice. Or you could share a video, transcript, or other reporting to inform and engage the wider community. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOOUSDAC.US PAGE 5 Packet Pg. 241 3.1.a STEP TWO: ARTICULATE Once you've identified the group or groups who should be recognized, formulate the statement of acknowledgment you'll share at the beginning of public gatherings. There is no exact script for this. Craft yours after considering several levels of detail you might introduce. At its simplest, an acknowledgment could look like this: "We acknowledge that we are on the traditional land of the People:" Beginning with just this simple sentence would be a meaningful intervention in most U.S. gathering spaces. From there, there are many other elements to bring into acknowledgment: Often, statements specifically honor elders: I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is being held on the traditional lands of the People, and pay my respect to elders both past and present:' Some allude to the caring, reciprocal relationship with land: "I want to respectfully acknowledge the People, who have stewarded this land throughout the generations:" Acknowledgments may also make explicit mention of the occupied, unceded nature of the territory in which a gathering is taking place: "We would like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which we gather is the occupied/unceded/ seized territory of the _ People." "I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are in , the ancestral and unceded territory of the _ People. In Canada it is not uncommon to make mention of the specific treaties by which land was designated to a particular tribal group. You may wish to do additional research to name the moment at which treaties were made as well as when they were broken and land unlawfully taken. The truth is complicated. Beneath the contemporary surface of any site in the United States, there are histories of belonging that have been erased, overlooked, contested and forgotten, all ways to support ideas like "manifest destiny" which justified the conquest of Native lands. Lengthier statements of acknowledgment can center Native communities while also acknowledging the many communities that have contributed to the existing culture of place. For example: Photo by Connie Fitzpatrick TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOOUSDAC.US PAGE 6 Packet Pg. 242 3.1.a "Every community owes its existence and vitality to generations from around the world who contributed their hopes, dreams, and energy to making the history that led to this moment. Some were brought here against their will, some were drawn to leave their distant homes in hope of a better life, and some have lived on this land for more generations than can be counted. Truth and acknowledgment are critical to building mutual respect and connection across all barriers of heritage and difference. We begin this effort to acknowledge what has been buried by honoring the truth. We are standing on the ancestral lands of the People [if possible, add more specific detail about the nature of the occupied [and]. We pay respects to their elders past and preseni. Please take a moment to consider the many legacies of violence, displacement, migration, and settlement that bring us together here today. And please join us in uncovering such truths at any and all public events" You may choose to begin with a simple statement of acknowledgment and elaborate over time as you learn more, build relationships with members of local Native communities, and grow more comfortable with the practice. "Takunsa Unsikila" by Keith BraveHeart (Oceti Sakowin: Oglala Lakota) DID YOU KNOW? "There are 567 federally recognized Indian Nations (variously called tribes, nations, bands, pueblos, communities and native villages) in the United States... Additionally, there are state recognized tribes located throughout the United States recognized by their respective state governments." Learn more from the National Congress of American Indians TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLO®+USDAC.US PAGE 7 Packet Pg. 243 3.1.a STEP THREE: DELIVER Once you've identified whom to name and practiced your statement (including pronunciation of names), offer your acknowledgment as the first element of a welcome to the next public gathering or event that you host. If in the process of learning about acknowledgment you've built relationships with members of Native communities, consider inviting them to give a welcome before yours. There's a danger that a practice like this becomes just another piece of protocol, delivered flatly and falling on deaf ears. How many times have you spaced out as the flight attendant goes through emergency procedures? Or failed to silence your Ceii phone ever•. though that was requested at the beginning of a show? Acknowledgment should be approached not as a set of obligatory words to rush through. These words should be offered with respect, grounded in authentic reflection, presence, and awareness. As you step up to offer acknowledgment, breathe in awareness of both the present and of the histories that connect you with the people you are naming. Consider your own place in the story of colonization and of undoing its legacy. At your next gathering, try acknowledgment out, see how it feels, observe how or if it shifts the room. Over time, through practice, you'll learn more about what it means and what it opens up for you and others. Statements of acknowledgment don't have to be confined to spoken words. Some artists, scholars, activists, and others have begun to include acknowledgment in email signatures or on websites. Consider using social media to amplify your acknowledgment. For example, post an image or a story of an event where your acknowledgment was offered, tagging it #HonorNativeLand to inspire others.. Any space, three-dimensional or digital, presents an opportunity to surface buried truths and lift up Native sovereignty, priming our collective culture for deeper truth and reconciliation efforts. 'Annual Canoe Journey, Washington" Photo courtesy of Native Arts and Cultures Foundation We are still America. We Know the rumors of our demise. We spit them out. They Die Soon:' Joy Harjo (Muscogee), 2015 Poetic Address to the Nation TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOeUSDAC.US PAGE 8 Packet Pg. 244 3.1.a BEYOND ACKNOWLEDGMENT Acknowledgment is the beginning. Acknowledgment —and the research required to do it with integrity — should be an invitation to deeper analysis, relationship, and action. "I think we need to start imagining a constellation of relationships that must be entered into beyond territorial acknowledgments. Great, that's awesome you know you're on (for example) Treaty 6 territory. That's great you acknowledge that perhaps the Indigenous view of that treaty, that the land was not surrendered, is correct. Perhaps you understand the tension of your presence as illegitimate, but don't know how to deal with it beyond naming it. Maybe now it is time to start learning about your obligations as a guest in this territory. What are the Indigenous protocols involved in being a guest, what are your responsibilities? What responsibilities do your hosts have towards you, and are you making space for those responsibilities to be exercised? To what extent are your events benefiting your hosts?" — Chelsea Vowel, Metis from the Plains Cree speaking community of Lac Ste. Anne, Alberta http://apihtawikosisan.com/2016/09/beyond-territorial-acknowledgments/ LEARN MORE Take time to learn about the Indigenous history of the land you live on, as well as the contemporary context of Native groups in your region. Search for books, articles, people, and organizations that you can learn from. • Find syllabi online to follow on your own or with a study group. Here is an example of a thoughtful syllabus created in solidarity with efforts at Standing Rock to resist the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. • For an overview of Tribal Nations and their historical relationship to the U.S. government, read this primer from the National Congress of American Indians. Educate yourself on the history of settler colonialism and genocide in the United States by reading (or listening to) An Indigenous People's History of the United States by Roxanne Dunbar -Ortiz. Learn about the history of broken treaties in the U.S. and about Indigenous sovereignty movements to correct for past injustices. Read the American Indian Movement's "Trail of Broken Treaties 20 Point Position Paper" here. Read about the Native Hawaiian sovereignty movement here. Read Suzan Shown Harjo's Nation to Nation: Treaties Between the United States and American Indian Nations. Read the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The United States was one of four nations to vote against Vie declaration when it was first adopted in 2007. It was the last of the four to reverse that in 2010. Where can a Truth and Reconciliation process lead? Check out the calls to action that emerged from Canadas commission. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOGUSDAC.US PAGE 9 Packet Pg. 245 3.1.a • Consider that the 2010 Census listed the percentage of urban Native people at 71%. Many Indigenous people are among those seeking or building community in cities. BUILD RELATIONSHIPS AND TAKE ACTION • Find out if there are active Native groups or organizations in or near your community. Learn about their work and see how you can support them. • Be in touch with local Native community members to discern how best to introduce the practice of acknowledgment and explore how that might lead to further dialogue and collaboration. • Look around and ask yourself: are there Native folks present at your events? On your team? On your board? If not, what would it take to begin building those relationships? How might you move from acknowledgment into relationship? If your role involves programming at a cultural or educational institution, how might you ensure that the programming itself represents a commitment to Native voices, stories, and perspectives? • Follow Indigenous leadership an efforts to. resist destruc-tion of land and life_ Read this powerful call to action from Indigenous Women Rising. A FEW ORGANIZATIONS TO CHECK OUT: • Native Arts and Cultures Foundation. Expose yourself to the work of Native artists, poets, musicians, authors, filmmakers working in community. • Indigenous Environmental Network, "an alliance of Indigenous Peoples whose Shared Mission is to Protect the Sacredness of Earth Mother from contamination & exploitation by Respecting and Adhering to Indigenous Knowledge and Natural Law:' • National Congress of American Indians: NCAI "founded in 1944, is the oldest, largest and most representative American Indian and Alaska Native organization serving the broad interests of tribal governments and communities:' • First People's Fund works to "honor and support the Collective Spirit@ of First Peoples artists and culture bearers:' • Vision Maker Media "empowers and engages Native People to tell stories" • Cultural Survival "advocates for Indigenous Peoples' rights and supports Indigenous communities' self- determination, cultures and political resilience:' • Endangered Language Alliance: NYC -based organization that "documents and describes underdescribed and endangered languages, educating a larger public and collaborating with communities" • Indian Country Media Network: Source for Native news. On hiatus, but archive still accessible. DOWNLOAD ART OR MAKE YOUR OWN! Imagine going to a local coffee shop, music venue, grocery store, or even town hall, and finding a sign on the wall acknowledging traditional lands. Sound far-fetched? It doesn't have to be! As part of this campaign to #HonorNativeLands, we partnered with several artists to create downloadable signs that you can customize and post in your community. Signs and posters are available for download from the Honor Native Land Public Folder. You are also invited to make your own signs or posters. Consider partnering with local artists and a local printshop to make a customized set of acknowledgment posters for your community. SPREAD THE WORD Share the guide and call to action. In the Honor Native Land Public Folder there are sample social media posts, signs and other materials that you can use to spread the word about this campaign. Use the hashtag #HonorNativeLand. TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US ! HELLOG►USDAC.US PAGE 10 Packet Pg. 246 3.1.a TAKE THE PLEDGE We urge organizations, collectives, institutions, and agencies to publicly commit to practicing traditional Native land acknowledgment. To stand and be counted and to inspire others with your commitment, take the pledge here. ABOUT THE USDAC The U.S. Department of Arts and Culture (USDAC) is a people -powered department —a grassroots action network inciting creativity and social imagination to shape a culture of empathy, equity, and belonging. Since 2014, the USDAC has engaged more than 25,000 artists, activists, and allies in 40, states in arts - based dialogues and actions. By creating opportunities for learning, connection, and collective action at the local and national level, the USDAC works toward a society that affirms the right to culture; values each community's heritage, contributions, and aspirations; and dismantles all barriers to love and justice. For more information and to get involved visit: www.usdac.us. BE IN TOUCH Did this guide inspire you to action? Do you already have stories of success or challenges implementing acknowledgment as a practice at your organization or institution? Do you want to strategize about how to spread the practice of acknowledgment in your region or create a campaign to introduce acknowledgment as official policy in your town or city? We'd love to hear from you. Drop us a line at helloousdac.us. 'Auto Immune Response" by William Wilson (Dine) TOGETHER, WE CREATE. USDAC.US I HELLOGUSDAC.US PAGE 11 Packet Pg. 247 3.1.a HOME (/) WHO WE ARE GET INVOLVED BLOG (/BLOG) 49,11DONATE) APRIL 26, 2018 (/NEWS-LONG/2018/4/26/HONOR-NATIVE- LAND-ARE-YOU-HESITATING-ACKNOWLEDGMENT- FAQS) Honor Native Land. Are You Hesitating? Acknowledgment FAQs Vnews- Long /2o18/4/26/honor- native-land-are-you-hesitating- acknowLedg ment-fags) BLOG (/NEWS-LONG/CATEGORY/BLOC), NEWS (/NEWS- LONG/CATEGORY/NEWS) Back in October, the USDAC launched Honor Native Land: A Guide and Call to Acknowledgment (https://usdac.us/nativeland), calling on all individuals and organizations to open public events and gatherings with acknowledgment of the traditional Native inhabitants of the land. Since then, more than 7,000 people have downloaded the Guide and many have put it advice into practice, with hundreds signing the pledge to make acknowledgment a regular custom. Have you been hesitant about acknowledging Native lands at your event? We hope these FAQs will clear things up! I like the idea, but shouldn't an Indigenous person be the one to offer acknowledgment? I'm not Native American. Cultural democracy —the USDAC's animating principle —says we all share responsibility for a social order of belonging, equity, and justice. If the hard work of confronting and overturning dis-belonging and injustice is left to those most directly affected, everyone else is shirking this collective responsibility. Acknowledgment isn't a favor others do for Indigenous people. just like taking action to stop someone from disrespecting or insulting others on account of their gender, orientation, ethnicity, or religion, acknowledgment is a step toward cultural democracy. I'm really nervous about making a mistake. What if 1 mispronounce something? What if 1 do it wrong? The most basic forms of acknowledgment we recommend in the Guide are very simple, for instance: "I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is being held on the traditional lands of the People, and pay my respect to elders both past and present." It is fairly easy to find the name(s) Packet Pg. 248 pertaining to your region. (The Guide is full of suggestions as to how to research 3.1.a this, connecting with local Native organizations, Indigenous studies programs at universities in your region, and online resources.) Much information is available through this online Native Land map (https://native-tand.ca/); it is often possible to learn correct pronunciation of tribal names by clicking their links on that map. If fear of making a mistake trumps doing the right thing, we're in trouble! If you try acknowledgment with an attitude of sincerity and humility —asking to be corrected if you stumble —most people will respond in kind. tt+ +t +ttt t h• tt tt_+t What about all the other people who lived here —the Africans who were brought against their will to the communities of color pushed out to make way for gentrification? Shouldn't we acknowledge them too? 0 4- S vi m L 0 W t_ :.i Q Packet Pg. 249 The Guide says that "[f]or more than five hundred years, Native communities across the Americas have demonstrated resilience and resistance in the face of violent efforts to separate them from their land, culture, and each other:' They may have been the first on this landmass harmed by colonial policies, but by no means the last. If you wish to broaden your acknowledgment, the Guide also suggests a longer acknowledgment formula: "Every community owes its existence and vitality to generations from around the world who contributed their hopes, dreams, and energy to making the history that led to this moment. Some were brought here against their will, some were drawn to leave their distant homes in hope of a better life, and some have lived on this land for more generations than can be counted. Truth and acknowledgment are critical to building mutual respect and connection across all barriers of heritage and difference. We begin this effort to acknowledge what has been buried by honoring the truth. We are standing on the ancestral lands of the People [if possible, add more specific detail about the nature of the occupied land]. We pay respects to their elders past and present. Please take a moment to consider the many legacies of violence, displacement, migration, and settlement that bring us together here today. And please join us in uncovering such truths at any and all public events." What about more than an acknowledgment: a prayer, ceremony, or performance? Is it okay for me to try for that? There are many possible steps beyond acknowledgment. All should be offered by Indigenous people. When members of one Native people visit the territory of another, they may engage in a formal exchange of greetings, gifts, and blessings. Artists or spiritual leaders whose tribe's traditional lands are the site of your event may be invited to offer a traditional cultural protocol or to acknowledge ancestors with a song, prayer, or ritual. Whether you are non - Native or Indigenous, it is perfectly fine to reach out to local Indigenous organizations or individuals with an invitation like this, so long as it is done respectfully. It is important to offer an honorarium or gift as appropriate to the individual elder, artist, or spiritual leader invited to take part in this way. You say "Acknowledgment by itself is a small gesture. It becomes meaningful when coupled with authentic relationship and informed action." What kind of action? I'm worried that we will be asked to change our programs or staffing or governance in ways 1 can't make happen. Higher-ups could be upset if I open the door to requests they won't grant. The USDAC understands acknowledgement as a beginning, a possible opening to greater public consciousness of Native sovereignty and cultural rights and toward correcting the stories and practices that erase Indigenous people's history and culture, toward inviting and honoring the truth. To bring about equity, belonging, and justice, things have to change. The first steps toward that culture shift are awareness of what has been and what could be and public acknowledgment of those realities. Packet Pg. 250 3.1.a For non -Native organizations, entering into dialogue and relationship with Indigenous people calls for respect and reciprocity, deep listening and truth - telling. There is no immunity from facing these truths. Let us help you strategize about how to proceed: contact us at helloeusdac.us. We would love to hear about your experience with acknowledgment. A future blog will feature acknowledgment stories from across the U.S. Please share texts, photos, or any other material you like that will help others understand your own process of acknowledgment. Just write to us at helloeusdac.us. We'll ask your permission before using your experience in a future blog post. V- 2 LIKES < SHARE What Does A Amp Up Your Local Organizing: USDAC Outpost FAOs (/news-long/2018/5/10/amp-up-your-1 1�tge aFn � Ot t-' YOU? ,httns:, ,http:/, ,httn:/, Enlist as a Citizen Artist Stay tuned to news from the USDAC PRESS (/PRESS- CONTACT US First Name ARCHIVE) (/CONTACT) VIDEO (/VIDEO) AFFILIATES Last Name (/USDAC- BLOG (/NEWS- AFFILIATES) LONG) Email* PARTNERS EVENTS (/PARTNERS) (/CALENDAR) Zip/Postal Code FREQUENTLY Not in the US? DONATE ASKED (/DONATE) QUESTIONS Sign up! (/FAQS) Opt in to updates from U.S. Department of Arts and Culture Sponsored by: U.S. Department of Arts and Culture (https://actionnetwork.org/groups/us- department-of-arts-and-culture) 0 4- S vi m 0 M aD c aD E r Q Packet Pg. 251 3.1.a Audio by websitevoice.com (https://websitevoice.com) Q Packet Pg. 252 https://usdac.us/news-long/2018/4/26/honor-native-land-are-you-hesitating-acknowledgment-faqs 5/5 5/13/2019 #HonorNativeLand - A guide to respectfully acknowledge ancestral lands - Native Arts and Cultures Foundation #HonorNativeLand — A guide to respectfully acknowledge ancestra lands © October 3, 2017 25 Advocacy and Education, Blog The Native Arts and Cultures Foundation is proud to be involved in the U.S. Department of Arts and Culture's (USDAC) Honor Native Land: A Guide and Call to Acknowledgment, released today and dee to wnloafrom the USDAC website. We encourage Native peoples and non -Native allies to share and commit to the practice of #Honortheland. From the USADAC guide: "IN COUNTRIES SUCH AS NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, AND AMONG TRIBAL NATIONS IN THE U.S., it is commonplace, even policy, to open events and gatherings by acknowledging the traditional Indigenous inhabitants of that land. While some individuals and cultural and educational institutions in the United States have adopted this custom, the vast majority have not. Together, we can spark a movement to change that. We call on all individuals and organizations to open public events and gatherings with acknowledgement of the traditional Native inhabitants of the land. Acknowledgment is a simple, powerful way of showing respect and a step toward correcting the stories and practices that erase Indigenous people's history and culture and toward inviting and honoring the truth. Imagine this practice widely adopted: imagine cultural venues, classrooms, conference settings, places of worship, sports stadiums, and town halls, acknowledging traditional lands. Millions would be exposed —many for the first time —to the names o packet Pg. 253 https://www.nativeartsandcultures.org/honornativeland-guide-respectfully-acknowledge-ancestral-lands 2 5/13/2019 3.1.a #HonorNativeLand - A guide to respectfully acknowledge ancestral lands - Native Arts and Cultures Foundation traditional Indigenous inhabitants of the lands they are on, inspiring them to ongoing awareness and action." To download the guide, print, download and customize #Honortheland art, and more, visit https:/LLisdac.us/`—na Live land OWN �> 2017, Advocacy_, CommunityEngagernent in http s:lAvww. n ativea rtsandcul to res. org/h onom ative la nd.guide-respectfu I ly-acknowledge-ancestral-land s Packet Pg. 254 2/2 Land Acknowledgement - Real Rent Duwamish Page 2 "Northwest Film Forum acknowledges that we gather on Indigenous land: the traditional territory of Coast Salish peoples, specifically the Duwamish Tribe (Dkhw Duw'Absh)," Interior wall of Northwest Film Forum in Capitol Hill neighborhood. Packet Pg. 255 https://www.realrentduwamish.org/land-acknowledgement.html Land Acknowledgement - Real Rent Duwamish 3.1.a Page 1 o Real Rent Duwamish Land Acknowledgement Resources Publicly acknowledging the original stewards of the land you are on can be a meaningful way to honor indigenous peoples and resist erasure of their histories. The power of an acknowledgement lies in Iearni.ng as much as you can about local treaties and practices, while working to build accountable relationships. If you want to make a land acknowledgement but aren't sure where to start, here are some local, national, and international resources and examples: Beyond Territorial Acknowledgements U.S. Department of Arts and Culture: A Guide And Call To Acknowledgement Teen Vogue: Indigenous Land Acknowledgement, Explained "We at Seattle Mennonite church acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestral Lands of the Duwamish people, A people that are still here, continuing to honor and bring to light their ancient heritage." Exterior wall of Seattle Mennonite Church in North Seattle. This was a project of a senior high school student who worked closely with a Duwamish elder. https://www,realrentduwarnish.org/land-acknowledgement.html Packet Pg. 256 5/21/2019 5/13/2019 2018 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement I History of Science Society 4 About HSS Membership Meetings Et Events Careers Et Opportunities Resources Digital HSS Donate Now Meetings Et Events Future and Past Meetings Other Conferences Colloquia DONATE Q JOIN HSS 2019 MEETING VOLUNTEER V TWITTER f FACEBOOK O YOUTUBE 13 POST A JOB OR CONFERENCE An open access discovery service for the history r;i science IsisCS ;-dW—ftMV Explore the IsisCB .72�(Cil NT. e.rn h e v Neves ai-Rd i4exvs fi,cml the, Professie>g Animal Studies Journal 8.1 out now May 13, 2019 The emergence of the neo-colonial in the post- modern, global present; 2oi8 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement indigenous communities owned the land on which many institutions of research and education have been built. Academic conferences and events are also routinely held in these spaces. This land is essential to the identity and worldview of Indigenous groups. often these lands were taken under unjust and violent circumstances resulting in forced relocation that continues to have devastating effects on native communities. Indigenous Land Acknowledgements are one small but tangible way institutions of culture and education in the United States can begin repairing the harm caused by mainstream historical accounts, which have excluded Indigenous voices and obscured the centrality of violence to colonialism in the United States. Indigenous Land Acknowledgement refers to the practice of recognizing an Indigenous community's ancestral ties to the land on which a meeting or event is taking place. Acknowledging the communities that have an inseparable connection to the land on which these institutions reside challenges the mainstream narrative and calls attention to the strength of Indigenous communities which have survived the devastating effects of displacement and colonization. Further, this history informs the present experience of Native American peoples, so it is essential to the contextualization of current events. The ad hoc committee on Land Acknowledgement recommended that the History of Science Society implement the practice of Indigenous land acknowledgment for the 2o18 annual meeting in Seattle and for subsequent meetings. We see this as a step toward reparation for the harm caused by centuries of misrepresentation of Indigenous peoples and denial of their right to participate in the telling of their own narratives. These statements represent respect for Indigenous voices, acknowledgement of the violence of US history, and demonstrate that in most cases Indigenous peoples are still here to tell their story. The Seattle -area is home to six Nations: the Duwamish, Muckleshoot, Snohomish, Snoclualmie, Suduamish, and Tulalip peoples. This .1.......... year, Chairwoman Cecile Hansen from the Duwamish nation will open the conference at our Plenary Session. This ceremony is intended to provide an official welcome for all Meeting activities. Should your session or business meeting also wish to include a land acknowledgement, a sample statement can be found below. We strongly encourage conference attendees to learn about each nation's history and current realities through their websites. While the practice of Indigenous land acknowledgement is new to research and educational institutions in the United States, it has long been an established protocol among Indigenous groups around the world. It has even become standard in both Canada and Australia. Acknowledgement guides by Australians Together, the Canadian Association of University .............................................. . Teachers and the U.S. Department of Art and Culture all echo many of the same sentiments. .. ............... ....... A,; Wi i ciuiic;;l ar,d WWIviic cooki. < in to iirovidc the best a poriance ou Our w;ub,:ae. Accept & Close https:llhssonline.org/meetings/annual-meeting-archive/20l 8-hss-annual-meeting/2018-hss-meeting-land-acknowledgment/ Packet Pg. 257 1/5 5/13/2019 2018 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement I History of Science Society past and present, as well as living descendants and future 3.1.a Call for Columnists: generations." All three guides also state that it is important Perspectives Daily to be genuine in the acknowledgement, so this basic format April 12, 2oi9 can be altered to include information that it is appropriate to the specific setting. Additionally, all three emphasize the New Books in Science importance of reaching out to the specific Indigenous group Seeking Podcast Hosts or groups being acknowledged to ensure that the statement April ro, 2019 is respectful and accurately represents them in the way that they want to be represented. This is particularly important CFP: Special Issue at because, for far too long, Indigenous peoples have been Foundations of Science denied a say in their own representation. This inclusive on "James Joule's approach is therefore a step toward decolonizing these institutions. Bicentenary: Foundations and Nature Academic institutions and societies are particularly of Science Teaching" • • rrnportant spaces :n which to challenge the mvisi, ilizati,• or, April 6, 2org of Native peoples in the contemporary United States. Historically, the collection of Indigenous artifactual and �,%e ':'.i ire ;, biological material and intangible cultural heritage was •. motivated by the belief that Indigenous cultures would soon - — ........ disappear. Further, these collections were used to judge and hierarchically organize the cultures represented by these �� `�� objects. Scientists, policy -makers, and laypeople used the conclusions drawn from such studies of collections to justify �5 a violence of entire groups of people, including Indigenous communities. Additionally, because these pursuits were considered scientific, the knowledge of I I western trained scientists and collectors was and continues to be privileged over that of the represented peoples. The colonial, visual and global turns in the history of science have started to bring attention to Search j the historical significance of Indigenous knowledge systems. We see land acknowledgment policy as a logical next step in this positive trend towards more inclusive scholarship in the history of science. Academic institutions must focus on the realities and voices of contemporary Indigenous communities, since academic work from a range of disciplines has given the impression that these societies no longer exist. Indigenous land acknowledgement is already an established and common practice among Indigenous individuals and tribal or other Indigenous identity -related institutions. While these statements do make mainstream research and education institutions more welcome to Indigenous audiences, they are not the only audiences who need to hear them. This practice is about more than making space —it is about making the history of marginalized populations part of the mainstream consciousness. Though land acknowledgement is a small step, it is an important one that demonstrates an interest in truth -telling. As legal scholar Chelsea Vowel (Metis) and other Native scholars suggest, land acknowledgement should constitute the first step in a process of opening dialogue with Indigenous communities to learn about the specific laws and protocols of that Nation regarding the responsibilities of guests. A verbal acknowledgment, moreover, must be accompanied by concrete allocation of time and resources to both educate regarding the colonial history of the specific land upon which the meeting or event occurs, and to support the participation of Indigenous people in the society or institution. cLnIca( cwd aswlVli� 11 ol-CL:1 k pFu% the he- 0!1 e Accept & Close https:llhssonline,orglmeetings/annual-meeting-archivel2018-hss-annual-meetingl2018-hss-meeting-land-acknowledgment/ Packet Pg. 258 2/5 5/13/2019 2018 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement I History of Science Society 3.1.a history do not convey the gravity of the devastation that colonialism had on Native American peoples. They often deploy language that obscures the United States as the perpetrator of violence. Yet the use of truthful language is a central tenet of decolonizing methodologies. As described by Amy Lonetree (Ho-Cunk), "Scholars writing from the Indigenous paradigm employ more powerful and precise terms to describe what happened, including `genocide' and `atrocity,' and they do not shy away from naming the perpetrators of the violence in our history." It is important to make this statement in a space that is accessible to all visitors —not just those who are already inclined to seek out information related to Indigenous topics. One criticism of land acknowledgment policy has been the perception of its tokenism. Ne intend to correct for this by demanding that the land acknowledgement practice be a starting point that is then backed up by long-term efforts toward social justice. Dylan AT Miner, a Wiisaakodewinini (Metis) artist, activist, and scholar stresses on the fact that Land Acknowledgements "must be preceded by relationships with living Indigenous peoples, communities, and nations. It must then be followed with ongoing commitments to these same communities. Land Acknowledgements are a responsibility." For HSS, we propose that this practice include: (a) a formal invitation to Elders or community leaders from the Indigenous peoples upon whose land the meeting will occur to open the distinguished lecture or plenary session if this fits with their nation's protocols and interests (to be determined through direct consultation); (b) proposed text that panel chairs can consider using for land acknowledgement at the beginning of each session; (c) a guide to Native history of the region, available on the HSS website so that attendees can educate themselves about the history of the land where the meeting is taking place; (d) the commitment of resources or the appropriate fundraising to provide bursaries for Indigenous scholars to present at the conference. Bibliography and Resources • Garcia, Felicia (Santa Ynez band of Chumash). "You're on Indian Land: Making the Case for Indigenous Land Acknowledgement in Mainstream U.S. Museums." MA thesis, NYU, 2o18. • Shekon Neechie. "Bibliography." July 30, 2oi8. Accessed October 10, 2018. A select bibliography of historical works by Indigenous scholars on Indigenous histories in North America/Turtle Island. • Lonetree, Amy. DecolonizinMuseul„S: Re�resentin Native America in Nationaland Tribal Museums. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2012. • McCoy, Kate, Eve Tuck, and Marcia McKenzie. Land Education: Rethinking Pedagogies of Place from Indigenous, Postcolonial, and Decolonizing Perspectives, 2o16. • Murphy, Michelle. "UnsettHRg Care: Troubling'I'r&qSnaridnal Itineraries of Care in Feminist Health Practices." Social Studies of Science 45, no. 5 (October 1, 2015): 717-37. • Murphy, Michelle. "Alterlife and Deeolonial Chemical Relations." Cultural Anthropology 32, no. 4 (November 29, 20>7): 494-503• _._........... • Queensland Government. "Welcome to Country." Last modified May 4, 201'7. Accessed _............................................. February 1, 2o18. • TallBear, Kim. "Standing.Wth.and, p.ea ingaas Faith: A Feminist -Indigenous Approach _. ........ to IngLiiiy." Journal of Research Practice > o, no. 2 (2014): Article N17. • Tasmanian Government. "Acknowledgement and Welcome to Count ." Accessed Felmisry 1. 2n1 R.—..._...._ W_, use ischnical and enaIviie cuok;a;� in order to provide the best eaperi ncc on our websi!e. Accept & Close hftps://hssonl i ne. org/meetings/an nu a I-meeting-archive/20l 8-hss-a n n ual-meeti n g/2018-hss-meeting-I and-acknowl edgme nV Packet Pg. 259 3/5 3.1.a 5/13/2019 2018 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement I History of Science Society • Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. "Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action." June 2, 2015. Accessed February 5, 2oi8. • Tuck, Eve, and K. Wayne Yang. "Decoo.n..i..z..a.t.i..o.n..i.s no.t...a m.e..t..a...phor," Decolonization:l......... Indigeneity, Education & Society i, no. 1 (2012): 1-40. • Tuhiwai Smith, Linda. Recolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous,Pe2des. _ Dunedin: University of Otago Press, 1999• • University of British Columbia Museum of Anthropology (MOA). "Director's Welcome ............. ,........— ——...__... Message." Accessed February 1, 2oi8. • U.S. Department of Arts and Culture. "Honor Native Land: A Guide and Call to .....................—.,.......................................................................... Acknowledgement." Accessed October 15, 201�. N - Vowel, Chelsea. "Beyond Territorial Acknowledgements." Accessed Mal, �, 2018. Ad Hoc Committee Members: m v • Marissa Petrou (Louisiana State University) • Elaine LaFay (University of Pennsylvania) 7 d L • Felicia Garcia (Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, School for Advanced Research) 0 �. c d • Rosanna Dent (New Jersey Institute of Technology) E d • Khyati Nagar (York University) We are grateful for the generous help of Polly Olsen, Joshua Reid, and Michael Yates. C Please e-mail our committee with thoughts, questions, ideas or if you are interested in joining c v us at hss.land.acknowledgement@gmail.com. Q Indigenous History of the Seattle Area As you explore Seattle, you'll see numerous monuments and civic gestures to the city's Native heritage. While these rightfully implicate tremendous Indigenous influence in the early days of colonization —a recognition that comes on the heel of decades of Native activism —they also co- exist with violent marginalization. Prior to the arrival of settler colonists, the area currently called Seattle was known as Sdzidzilalitch (Little Crossing -Over -Place). Members of Coast Salish nations began witnessing the arrival of whites interested in land and wealth in the mid -nineteenth century. The emergence of Seattle unfolded slowly through a series of encounters and exchanges between settlers and Indigenous people, whose knowledge and labor shaped Seattle from its "village period" through the 1870s. By the late nineteenth century, those same encounters were marked by widespread disease and wrenching transformations to the landscape. During the Progressive Era, a contingent of Indigenous peoples resisted federal attempts at relocation and, despite enduring oppressive socioeconomic policies, some remained in Seattle. Native migrants also came to the city for seasonal employment and contributed to a brimming Indigenous urban community. Many Indigenous residents who remained moved within Seattle's underclass, living in working-class neighborhoods and frequenting social institutions on Skid Road. I Beginning in the postwar decades, organizations such as the American Indian Service League and community leaders like Ella Aquino and Bernie Whitebear led calls for better living \V� c( kios in order to plovi& the best esperence till utir wehi iLe. Accept & Close Packet Pg. 260 https://hssonline.org/meetings/annual-meeting-archive/2018-hss-annual-meeting/2018-hss-meeting-land-acknowledgment/ 4/5 2018 HSS Meeting Land Acknowledgement I History of Science Society 3.1.a example, were a means of regaining Indigenous rights to Seattle's fisheries and waterways. Many of these groups continue to exert authority over Indigenous rights in the city and undermine colonial narratives of Seattle's founding. Across the past century, white residents pushed Indigenous peoples to the hinterlands at the same time as they appropriated native cultures, traditions, and wares as status symbols. But these and other broader civic gestures to Indigenous heritage, manufactured and marketed largely in favor of an imperial narrative of extinction, obscure a longer, entangled history of presence. Further reading: • Duwamish Tribe. "Our History." (accessed October 15, 2018) .......................... • Tulalip Tribes. "History." (accessed October 15, 2018) • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. "History of the MuckleshvotIndianTribe and Its .. ............. Reservation." • (accessed October 15, 2oi8) • Snohomish Tribe of Indians. "Snohomish Tribe of Indians HistoryTimeline." (accessed October 15, 2018) • Snoqualmie Tribe. "History." (accessed October 15, 2018) .................... • Suquamish Tribe. "History and Culture." (accessed October 15, 2018) ...........1........ • Harmon, Alexandra. Indians in the Making: Ethnic Relations and Indian Identities around Puget Sound. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000. + Mingle, Matt. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007. • Reid, Joshua L. The Sea Is My Country: The Maritime World of the Makahs. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015. • Thrush, Coll. Native Seattle: Histories from the Crossing -Over -Place. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2007. 44o Geddes Hall I University of Notre Dame I Notre Dame, IN 46556 I te1574.631.1194 I fax 574.631.1533 I+fo ee hssonline.org 'A10 use technictil tint euial,�+u(: co,)' ia., in order to pro��ide the bect ezperiancc our c�ebsue. Accept & Close https:llhssonline.org/meetings/annual-meeting-archive/20l 8-hss-annual-meeting/2018-hss-meeting-land-acknowledgment/ Packet Pg. 261 5/5 5/13/2019 Land Acknowledgement — North Cascades Institute NORTH CASCADES INSTITUTE Connecting people. nature & community since 1986 Land Acknowledgement The human story of the North Cascades begins with the original stewards of these land and watersheds, the Indigenous Nations and their modern descendants. North Cascades Institute acknowledges that our programs take place in the ancestral homelands of Tribes, Bands, and First Nations, including most notably the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Samish Indian Nation, Nooksack Tribe, Lummi Nation, Sto:lo Nation, Nlaka'pamux Nation, Colville Confederated Tribes, Syilx/Okanagan Nation. As educators, we have a responsibility to examine our own relationship to the Land we live and teach on and to the local Indigenous communities whose traditions and identities originated in these special places. We acknowledge that the settlement period histories in this place often reflect the detrimental effects of disease, displacement, violence, migration, and loss of tenured land of Indigenous People. We offer this acknowledgement as a first step in honoring their relationship with land we share, and a call towards further learning and action, not in place of the authentic relationships with local Indigenous communities, but rather to assist in giving them voice. G ibal governments, museums and cultural centers of Washington State f W https://ncascades.org/discover/learning-center/land-acknowledgement Packet Pg. 262 1/3 5/13/2019 Land Acknowledgement— North Cascades Institute Sign up for Field Notes Once or twice a month you'll receive our Field Notes eNewsletter with the latest Institute news, natural history information and photography from the North Cascades, job announcements and special discounts. Take a Class with Us! EM Find a class using our Classes and Events Calendar Directions, weather, webcams and more A Visitors Guide to the learning Center Learning Center campus map Learning Center local trails map Learning Center sustainability information G Life at the Learning Center f Life as a grad student or Learning Center staff — personal, fun, weather, on campus hijinks.. READ MORE + Packet Pg. 263 https://ncascades.org/discover/learning-center/land-acknowledgement 5/13/2019 Tribal Lands Statement J Western Washington University Tribal Lands Statement For official university functions, following is a suggested tribal lands acknowledgement, tailored by location, to use in all opening remarks. I would like to begin by acl<nowledging that we gather today on the ancestral homelands of the Coast Salish Peoples, who have lived in the Salish Sea basin, throughout the San Juan Islands and the North Cascades watershed, from time immemorial. Please join me in expressing our deepest respect and gratitude for our indigenous neighbors, the Lummi Nation and Nooksacl( Tribe, for their enduring care and protection of our shared lands and waterways. Bellingham: Lummi Nation and the Nooksacl< Tribe Anacortes: Samish Indian Nation and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community Everett: Tulalip Tribes, the Snohomish, the Stillaguamish Tribe and the Saul(-Suiattle Tribe a I(itsap Peninsula: Suquamish Tribe and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Packet Pg. 264 httiDs://www.wwu.edu/tribal-lands-statement 1 /3 3.1.a 5/13/2019 Tribal Lands Statement i Western Washington University Olympic Peninsula: The Hoh Tribe, Jamestown 51<lallam Tribe, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Makah Indian Tribe, Quileute Tribe, Quinault Indian Nation, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and the Skokomish Tribe. Seattle: Duwamish, Suquamish, Nisqually, Snoqualmie and Muckleshoot tribes. 125 YEARS of ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE Campus Safety Resources Together Against Sexual, Violence DiSCIOSLire of Consumer Information Emergency and Weather Information O Regarding Public Expression and Assembly N L O Jobs Pay Bills z Vendors Q WAC Dor:ket Related Links Returning Students- Need to Apply? Our new tag(ine https./Iwww. wwu,ed u/tr-ibal-I ands -statement Packet Pg. 265 3.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/11/2019 Draft Urban Forest Management Plan Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Development Services Preparer: Diane Cunningham Background/History Development of an Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) began in 2017. Public process included open houses, website information, press releases, various public meetings and two public hearings. A draft was reviewed by both the Tree Board and Planning Board. Some revisions were made and the City Council reviewed the new draft and requested several other changes. These changes were made and last reviewed by the City Council on August 7, 2018. No vote on adoption was taken. After further discussion, a supplemental process began that included a small informal team of City staff, Tree Board members, a Planning Board member, and one or two active citizens. The process resulted in some last changes which were then incorporated by the consultant into a new revised draft UFMP. Staff Recommendation Approve this item to move forward on the next available agenda for City Council review and potential action. Narrative A new revised draft UFMP (attached) is ready for Council review. It includes changes that reflect key comments, for example: More attention to native trees of our area Removal of a map and references to tree planting opportunity areas More background discussion of tree issues Addition of information on city regulations for development Removal of references to specific dollar values represented by tree functions. Adoption of the revised UFMP would put the City in a position to better move forward on recommendations that are contained in the document. Attachments: EdmondsWA UFMP 2019_06_3 (1) Packet Pg. 266 � _ L Y � i i � i ■.1.+� n a � u� � �.. .rv� v"��Z� �� r r��e• -f � i r � ��� .. � � � 4 r��� ��.'� � ice`. `} *• � ^'�j` -`-NM1•10010101* � Urban Forest Management Plan May, 2019 3.2.a Packet Pg. 268 3.2.a City of Edmonds Urban Forest Management Plan May, 2019 , P C. I s �) "I DAVEYI-. Resource Group Prepared for: City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Davey Resource Group, Inc. 6005 Capistrano Avenue, Suite A Atascadero, California 93422 Phone: 805-461-7500 Toll Free: 800-966-2021 Fax: 805-461-8501 www.davey.com/drg Packet Pg. 269 3.2.a Acknowledgments CITY OF EDMONDS STAFF MEMBERS Shane Hope, Director, Development Services Carrie Hite, Director, Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Phil Williams, Director, Public Works and Utilities Brad Shipley, Associate Planner Diane Cunningham, Administrative Assistant Terri Arnold, Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department Debra Dill, Parks Senior Laborer, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department Jennifer Leach, Environmental Education & Sustainability Coordinator, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager, Development Services Department Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager, Public Works Department CITY OF EDMONDS CITIZENS' TREE BOARD Doug Petersen, Position 3 - Chair Frank Caruso, Position 1 - Vice Chair Gail Lovell, Position 2 William Phipps, Position 4 Barbara Chase, Position 5 Steve Hatzenbeler, Position 6 Vivian Olson, Position 7 Suzanne Jeugensen, Alt. CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Nathan Monroe, Position 4 - Chair Matt Cheung, Position 3 - Vice Chair Philip (Phil) Lovell, Position 1 Daniel Robles, Position 2 Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig, Position 5 Alicia Crank, Position 6 Todd Cloutier, Position 7 Mike Rosen, Alt. CITY OF EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Mike Nelson, Position 2 — Council President Diane Buckshnis, Position 4 — Council President Pro Tem Kristiana Johnson, Position 1 Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Position 3 Dave Teitzel, Position 5 Thomas Mesaros, Position 6 Neil Tibbott, Position 7 Cli E D 41 0 DAV FF Resource Group Packet Pg. 270 3.2.a Table of Contents Executive Summary Scope & Purpose Plan Foundation Introduction Community Benefits and Challenges of the Urban Forest What Do We Have? r Edmonds' Urban Forestry History Regulatory Framework Regional Plans and Legislation Regional Urban Forestry Resources Urban Tree Canopy Analysis Urban Forestry Practices - Case Studies Existing Urban Forest Practices What Do We Want? Stakeholder and Community Input How Do We Get There? Goals and Actions of the Plan How Are We Doing? Monitoring and Measuring Results Appendices Appendix A: References Appendix B: Table of Figures Appendix C: Community Survey Responses Appendix D: Open House Summary Report Packet Pg. 271 3.2.a Executive Summary Background & Purpose Urban forest simply means the trees in an urban area. An urban forest management plan is a long- term plan for managing trees in a city. The purpose of the City of Edmonds Urban Forest Management Plan is to provide guidance for managing, enhancing, and growing trees in the City of Edmonds over the next 20 years. Special emphasis is placed on managing trees on public property and along the public rights -of -way. Public Involvement ;n Process Public involvement has been part of developing and finalizing the Urban Forest Management Plan. The involvement has included open houses, website postings, informal survey, press releases, and submitted public comments, as well as formal public meetings by the Tree Board, Planning Board, and City Council. Plan Overview and Conclusion Edmonds, like many cities in the Pacific Northwest, once had large stands of old -growth trees that included Douglas fir and Western red cedar. Most of these were logged off years ago and development of streets, homes, businesses, schools, churches, and additional settlement followed. In some places, new trees have grown up or been planted. For Edmonds today, tree canopy coverage is estimated to be about 30.3% of the total city area. Trees have many benefits, but also some challenges. Selecting the right tree for a particular location makes a difference in how the tree will perform and thrive. Appropriate planting methods and tree care are important too. The Cty has a program of planting and caring for trees in public places —such as City parks and along various streets. In addition, the City has regulations about certain aspects of trees on private property. Notably, Edmonds is certified as a "Tree City USA" city and supports an active Citizens Tree Board. The Tree Board, as well as City staff, helps provide public education and participation in volunteer events to plant trees. Throughout the community, many residents also value and take care of trees on their property. To promote future sustainability and urban forest health, thoughtful planning and actions are needed. The Plan identifies five long-range goals to help the City move forward. The goals are: 1. Maintain or enhance citywide canopy coverage 2. Manage public trees proactively 3. Incentivize protecting and planting trees on private property 4. Provide resources to the community to educate/inform on tree planting and care 5. Promote "right tree, right place". Specific action strategies are identified to address each of the Plan's long-range goals. These would be implemented over time, as resources are available, to address priority needs. Furthermore, the Urban Forest Management Plan should be reviewed every five to ten years and updated as needed. 1 Scope & Purpose Packet Pg. 272 3.2.a Overview The plan includes long-range goals and action strategies to promote sustainability, species diversity, and greater canopy cover. Publicly -managed trees along streets, in parks, and at City facilities are collectively referred to as the community urban forest. Privately owned trees are also considered part of the urban forest in this plan because of their function and contribution to the sustainability of the overall urban forest in Edmonds; however, the City recognizes that it has a limited role in the care of private trees. Recognizing the significance of environmental and socioeconomic benefits provided by trees and their relationship with a high quality of life, the UFMP aims to: • Illustrate the value and benefits of trees. • Promote shared vision and collaboration between community residents. • Establish benchmarks and metrics to monitor the long-term success of management strategies. • Enhance the health and sustainability of the community urban forest. • Increase the vital benefits that the trees provide to Edmonds and the region. • Ensure that resources are in place to support the care and management of the community's trees. This UFMP includes goals and action strategies for the long-term and short-term in support of this purpose. It identifies appropriate resources to adequately manage community trees. It is intended to remain flexible and dynamic, allowing for the exploration and implementation of the actions as funding and resources permit. The development of the UFMP included a comprehensive review of existing policies and regulations, currentfunding and maintenance levels, analysis of the extent, condition, and composition of the existing tree resources, stakeholder concerns, and community input. Plan Foundation Spending any amount of time outdoors in Edmonds will reveal the abundant and diverse natural resources found within City parks and surrounding residences and businesses. Besides the obvious amenities available to a city on the coastline of the Puget Sound, another abundant natural wonder in Edmonds is its trees. Interspersed amongst the buildings and roads, trees provide the City with the shade, fresh air, and softened landscape that help people achieve the unique experience referred to as; "an Edmonds kind of day." All of the trees in Edmonds make up the City's urban forest tree resource. Without active management, this urban forest is at risk. What What Do We Do We Have? Want? How How Do I Are We -ql% We Get Doing? There? c a. c a� E M �a c M U) W 0 U_ c M D w L 0 M i 0 o� i 0 N a. U) 0 E w c m E M U 0 r a Scope & Purpose 2 Packet Pg. 273 3.2.a In December 2016, the City adopted a Comprehensive Plan that formally recognized that the community places a high value on the conservation of the urban forest. This Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) is intended to be an element that aligns in support of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, this UFMP aligns with the intentions of, "providing a framework for moving the Edmonds community toward a sustainable future that integrates and responds to environmental, economic, and social needs in a way which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (Comp Plan, 2016). Thefollowingprinciples for urbanforest management set the framework for the UFMP: • Optimize the ecosystem services provided by trees. • Control tree maintenance costs to the community. • Create pathways to stable and predictable funding. • Mitigate risks and liabilities associated with trees. The structure and organization of the UFMP are based on the understanding of what we have, what we want, how we get there, and how we are doing. This structure, referred to as adaptive management, is commonly used for resource planning and management (Miller, R.W., 1988) and provides a good conceptual framework for managing community forest resources. The plan development process involved a comprehensive review and assessment of the existing community tree resource, including composition, value, and environmental benefits. The process explored community values, existing regulations, and policies related to community trees. In addition, there were multiple stakeholders, internal and external, who played a role in the planning, design, care, and advocacy around the community forest. These stakeholders include the general public, City departments, the Citizens' Tree Board, and Snohomish Public Utility District (PUD). Each of these stakeholders contributed to the development of this Plan. What Do We Have? Edmonds was founded along the coast of the Puget Sound in 1890. Similar to the rest of the region, Edmonds had forestlands that were logged and waters that were fished. As Edmonds has grown in population, the forest has been urbanized and divided for parks, homes, and businesses. Recognizing the role of trees in the community and the necessity to manage them, the City drafted a Streetscape Plan in 2002 that included tree planting guidelines as part of the general aesthetic goals for the community. Revised in 2006 and again in 2015, elements of this Plan introduced tree care policy that has since been the source for many of the City's tree management decisions. In terms of regulations, the care for the urban forest is generally understood to be required by the Growth Table 1: Benchmark Values (2017) The City Acres 6,095 Population 41,841) Land lower Tree Canopy 30% brass & Vegetation 27% 1 m peruio us Su rfaces 34% Bare Soils 2% Open Water 7% Tree Canopy Corer Maximum Potential Canopy 57% Invesborlit _ Tree i re Per Capita $ 7.74 .3 scope & Purpose Packet Pg. 274 3.2.a Management Act of 1990. Guidance is provided by the City's Comprehensive Plan (2016), the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (2016), and the Streetscape Plan (2015). These primary documents define the reach of existing regulations and policies within which care for the urban forest is mandated: • Comprehensive Plan (2016) - Environmental Quality Goal A - "...Protect environmental quality within the Edmonds community through the enforcement of community -based environmental regulations." • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (2016) - Natural Resource and Habitat Conservation Goal 4 — "Preserve and provide access to natural resource lands for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education." • Objective 4.5 - Expand the urban forest and increase tree canopy in Edmonds. • Action Plan 4.G - Steward the urban forest using appropriate maintenance of street and park trees, clear removal and replacement policies and providing information about urban forestry to property owners. • Streestcape Plan (Revised 2015) - Celebrate Sustainable Practices. In redesigning the corridor, it is critical that the new interventions improve the street's performance. This includes enhancing the street environment and gateways for pedestrian benefits through an Urban Forestry program in the Downtown/Waterfront area. The urban forest is a combination of both public and private trees. Any trees that the City has direct control of and responsibility for are defined as the community tree resource. This includes public trees in parks, along rights -of -way, and around City facilities. Managing any resource begins with defining what is being managed and establishing benchmarks along with clearly defined goals and expectations. While public trees along major arterials and high - profile areas are well-known and routinely cared for by City staff, other public street trees are expected to be maintained by the adjacent property owner. Aside from individual development applications, the City does not have a method to take an inventory or track the history, status, or location of public trees. In addition, providing adequate care for trees requires a level of knowledge and a skill set that many property owners do not have. The planning process for this UFMP included an assessment of tree canopy. The results of the study provide a clear picture of the extent and distribution of tree canopy across Edmonds, benchmarking the average tree canopy cover at 30.3%. Analysis of historical change estimates that the City has lost 114 acres of its tree canopy since 2005. In 2005, there was an average tree canopy cover of 32.3%. The primary challenges and opportunities for urban forest management are: • Private owners control the majority of tree canopy (83.0%) with few regulations to limit tree removal, except when the trees are associated with development or are within an environmentally critical area. • There is limited knowledge about the condition of trees in the urban forest. • There is an estimated 1,651 acres is theoretically available for planting to expand the urban forest canopy'. The views of scenic places are fundamental to Edmonds' identity as a community and require balanced consideration with the care of the urban forest. Scenic views are highly valued in long- established development. At the same time, appreciation of trees —especially "the right trees in the right place" —is a value shared by most residents. 1 This estimate is partly based on an analysis of low-lying vegetation areas. c (L c a� E a� �a c M U) 4) 0 LL c M w 0 M i 0 i o� 0 N (L 2 LL Q U) c 0 E w c as E U 0 r a Executive Summary 4 Packet Pg. 275 Land Cover 3.2.a V Bare Soils 2% Grass/Vegetati( 27% Figure 1: Land Cover -anopy npervious 34% � I 2 1,: N RT City ijmits T Tree canopy R �2anl Grass/Low-Lying Vegetation sr ISTHsr Impervious Surfaces # Bare Soil open Water Y N r � $T 0 025 0.5 1 y Miles Figure 1: Land Cover Jr Executive Summary c a c a� E w ca c M U) w L O U- r- M D W L r• M �I 0 CD N a 2 LL 'Q N C O w c m M U M r Q Packet Pg. 276 3.2.a 17 What Do We Want? The plan development process included substantial outreach to public stakeholders, residents, and non-profit agencies. The process provided a broad perspective of the challenges that face Edmonds' urban forest. Through open house forums and public meetings, the City has found an engaged set of residents with varying opinions on matters pertaining to the care of the urban forest. City Staff were also consulted during plan development, with City code and public safety being the main considerations when making tree care decisions. City Staff will often take a reactive approach to tree management by performing work on trees as problems are discovered, but they also look for opportunities to plant trees in strategic public places. Open house forums and public meetings provided perspective on community interests and concerns about the urban forest. In general, stakeholders from both the community and City Staff share the following desired outcomes for the UFMP: • Preservation and Enhancement of Tree Canopy • Sustainability, Health, and Safety of the Community Tree Resource • Preservation and Enrichment of Wildlife and Habitat • Increased Outreach and Education • Increased Collaboration with Volunteers and Non-profit Groups • Strategies and Policies to Minimize Potential Tree Conflicts Executive summary 6 Packet Pg. 277 3.2.a How Do We Get There? The long-range strategic goals provided in this Plan are proposed to address the three components of a sustainable urban forestry program through specific actions: Urban Forest Asset Actions - which are intended to improve the urban forest resource over the next 20 years by developing detailed How Are We Doing? The UFMP presents opportunities to care for the urban forest in Edmonds by providing an overarching framework for urban forestry operations, policies, and programs. It presents a high-level review of urban forest management in the City, including historical context and an exploration of the benefits of Edmonds' trees. Building upon that information, the Plan connects the community's vision for the urban forest with appropriate goals and actions. expectations for the urban forest. This Plan provides various goals to pursue along a 20-year timeline concluding in 2038. These short • Municipal Resource Actions - which are and long-term goals will be achieved by adapting intended to drive improvements in City policy the Plan according to a five-year cyclical review of and practices by developing efficiency and operational objectives. The success of the UFMP alignment of efforts within City departments. will be measured through the realization of goals • Community Resource Actions - which are and will be demonstrated through the health of intended to build stronger community the urban forest and increased environmental engagement and public participation in urban benefits. Ultimately, it will lead to an enhancement forest stewardship. of tree canopy throughout the City. Furthermore, the greatest measurement of success for the UFMP will be how successful it is in meeting community expectations for the care and preservation of the community tree resource. Goal 1- Maintain citywide canopy coverage Goal 2 - Manage public trees pro -actively Goal 3 - Incentivize protecting & planting trees on private Goal 4 - Provide resources to the community to educate/inform on tree planting and care Goal 5 - Promote "Rieht tree. rieht glace" Youth volunteers helping with tree resource management. 7 Executive Summary Packet Pg. 278 3.2.a Introduction Trees play an essential role in the community of Edmonds, providing numerous tangible and intangible benefits to residents, visitors, neighboring communities, businesses, and wildlife. Research demonstrates that healthy urban trees can improve the local environment and lessen the impact resulting from urbanization and industry (U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Division, 2017). Trees can improve air quality, reduce energy consumption, help manage stormwater, reduce erosion, provide critical habitat for wildlife, and promote a connection with nature. In addition to these direct improvements, healthy urban trees increase the overall attractiveness of a community. In Portland, Oregon, street trees were found to add an average of $8,870 to homes' sales price as well as reduce time on the market for home sales by 1.7 days (Donovan et al., 2010). Studies on the business benefits of trees have shown how retail districts promote longer and more frequent shopping and greater sales (Wolf, 2007). Urban trees support a more livable community, fostering psychological health and providing residents with a greatersense of place (Kuo, 2003). Communitytrees, both public and private, soften the urban hardscape by providing a green sanctuary and making the City of Edmonds a more enjoyable place to live, work, and play. The City has emphasized the importance of trees within the Comprehensive Plan (2016), so much so that public trees are defined as a valued community resource, a critical component of the urban infrastructure, and a part of the City's identity. Edmonds' trees are a valued community resource Community Early settlements were built in the City to access natural resources, where shingle mills became the primary industry. Although construction of the Great Northern Railway along the waterfront was expected to be the main source of growth in the City, most growth occurred due to its proximity to Seattle. Passenger ferry service has also helped the town grow and prosper. Edmonds' population, from 2017 State estimates, is 41,260 people and covers a land area of 8.9 square miles. It is the third largest city in the county after Everett and Marysville. By 2035, the population is expected to be 45,550. The urban forest in this community is defined by its public and privately managed trees. Through parks and public rights -of -way, the City maintains a diverse population of trees intended for city streetscapes (typically nursery grown hardwoods), as well as native trees (naturally regenerating conifers and deciduous trees). Privately managed trees may be remnant forest trees connected with early logging history, naturally growing native trees and even invasive hardwoods. Community Vision for the UFMP Edmonds' Comprehensive Plan provides a vision of the City as an attractive, sustainable community for all ages. It specifically recognizes the value of trees as contributing to that vision and directs that an urban forest management plan be used as a guide for decisions on managing the forest resource, especially focusing on public land and rights -of -way. For private lands, the UFMP would guide education and incentives to encourage good tree management practices. c a c as E a� a� �a c M U) 4) 0 U- c M L D w 0 MI 0 I o� 0 N a 2 U- U) c 0 E w c as U 0 r a Introduction 8 Packet Pg. 279 3.2.a Benefits and Challenges of the Urban Forest Urban and natural forests work constantly to mitigate the effects of urbanization and development, which protects and enhances lives within the community. In general, there are five (5) important ways in which trees provide benefits: Water Quality, Carbon Sequestration, Energy Savings, Air Quality, and Socioeconomic benefits. Water Quality Urban stormwater runoff is a major source of contamination for the Puget Sound and riparian areas throughout Edmonds, threatening both human health and wildlife, including salmon populations. Requirements for surface water management are becoming more stringent and costly for both developers and the City. By incorporating the right mix of urban trees into stormwater management planning, runoff volumes, peak stream flows and flooding incidents may all be reduced; a strategy that may lessen the need for constructing stormwater management facilities and the cost of treatment to remove sediment and other pollutants. Typical overview of waterfront homes in Edmonds. 9 Introduction Trees improve and protect water quality by: • Intercepting Rainfall —Trees intercept rainfall in their canopy, which act as a mini -reservoir. Some water evaporates from the canopy and some slowly soaks into the ground, reducing the total amount of runoff (Xiao, et al., 2000). Canopy interception also lessens soil compaction, which in turn further reduces runoff. • Increasing soil capacity and infiltration — Root growth and decomposition increase the capacity and rate of soil infiltration by rainfall and snowmelt resulting in slower percolation rates and increasing the filtration of contaminants (Xiao, et al., 2007). • Reducing soil erosion — Tree roots reduce the flow and volume of stormwater runoff, avoiding erosion and preventing sediments and other pollutants from entering streams, rivers, Lake Washington, and the Puget Sound (WA Department of Ecology, 2011). • Providing salmon habitat — Shade from trees helps to cool warm urban runoff, which poses a threat to anadromous fish, like salmon. Shade from trees provides lakeside and riparian habitat for salmon and cools water temperatures, increasing dissolved oxygen, which is essential to salmon survival (Puget Sound Partnership, 2012). Packet Pg. 280 3.2.a Carbon Sequestration As environmental awareness continues to increase, governments are paying particular attention to global warming and the effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As energy from the sun (sunlight) strikes the Earth's surface it is reflected back into space as infrared radiation (heat). Greenhouse gases absorb some of this infrared radiation and trap this heat in the atmosphere, increasing the temperature of the Earth's surface. Many chemical compounds in the Earth's atmosphere act as GHGs, including methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), carbon dioxide (CO), water vapor, and human -made gases/aerosols. As GHGs increase, the amount of energy radiated back into space is reduced, and more heat is trapped in the atmosphere. An increase in the average temperature of the earth is resulting in changes in weather, sea levels, and land -use patterns, commonly referred to as "climate change." In the last 150 years, since large-scale industrialization began, the levels of some GHGs, including CO2, have increased by 25% (U.S. Energy Information Administration). Trees absorb atmospheric carbon, which reduces greenhouse gases. The carbon -related function of trees is measured in two ways: storage (total stored in tree biomass) and sequestration (the absorption rate per year) (Jo, et al., 1995). Urban trees reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) in two ways: • Directly —Through growth and the sequestration of CO2 as wood and foliar biomass. • Indirectly — By lowering the demand for air conditioning, thereby reducing the emissions associated with electric power generation and natural gas consumption. Stormwater runoff from streets needs to be controlled. Trees will slow and intercept stormwater, reducing the burden on stormwater infrastructure. Energy Savings Electric and gas utilities develop energy conservation solutions to keep rates low for their customers, reduce their need to build new lines, and, ultimately, to be good environmental stewards. Energy services delivered to Edmonds residents are provided by Snohomish County Public Utility District (SNOPUD). This organization recognizes how trees can reduce energy consumption and encourages Edmonds residents to consider trees as a cooperative strategy for improving energy conservation (SNOPUD, 2017). Urban trees and forests modify the environment and conserve energy in three principal ways: • Shade dwellings and impervious surfaces — Impervious surfaces in 2011 were assessed as 34% of the total land base (Edmonds, 2017). Shade from trees reduces the amount of radiant energy absorbed and stored by these impervious surfaces, thereby reducing the urban heat island effect, a term that describes the increase in urban temperatures in relation to surrounding locations (Simpson & McPherson, 2000). Shade from trees also reduces the amount of energy used to cool a structure (Simpson, 2002). • Transpiration —Transpiration releases water vapor from tree canopies, which cools the surrounding area. Through shade and transpiration, trees and vegetation within an urban setting modify the environment and reduce heat island effects. Temperature differences of more than 97 (5°C) have been observed between city centers without canopy cover and more forested suburban areas (Akbari, et al., 1997). • Wind reduction — Trees can reduce wind speeds by up to 50% and influence the movement of air and pollutants along streets and out of urban canyons. By reducing air movement into buildings and against conductive surfaces (e.g., glass, metal siding), trees can reduce conductive heat loss. c a c a� E a� a� �a c M U) 0 U_ c M D w 0 M I 0 o� I 0 N a 2 U_ Q c 0 E w c m E z U 0 r a Introduction 10 Packet Pg. 281 3.2.a Air Quality Urban trees improve air quality in five fundamental ways: • Reducing particulate matter (e.g., dust and smoke) • Absorbing gaseous pollutants • Shade and transpiration • Reducing power plant emissions • Increasing oxygen levels They protect and improve air quality by intercepting particulate matter (PM10), including dust, ash, pollen, and smoke. The particulates are filtered and held in the tree canopy where they are eventually washed harmlessly to the ground. Trees and forests absorb harmful gaseous pollutants like ozone (0), nitrogen dioxide (NO), and sulfur dioxide (SO). Shade and transpiration reduces the formation of 03, which is created during higher temperatures. Scientists are now finding that some trees may absorb more volatile organic compounds (VOC's) than previously thought (Karl, T. et al 2010; Science NOW, 2010). VOC's are a class of carbon -based particles emitted from automobile exhaust, lawnmowers, and other human activities. By reducing energy needs, trees also reduce emissions from the generation of power. And, through photosynthesis, trees and forests increase oxygen levels. The needles of these douglas fir trees help improve air quality. Aesthetic, Habitat, Socioeconomic, and Health Benefits While perhaps the most difficult to quantify, the aesthetic and socioeconomic benefits from trees may be among their greatest contributions, including: • Beautification, comfort, and aesthetics • Shade and privacy • Wildlife habitat • Opportunities for recreation • Reduction in violent crime • Creation of a sense of place and history • Reduced illness and reliance on medication and quicker recovery from injury or illness Some of these benefits are captured as a percentage of property values, through higher sales prices where individual trees and forests are located. In addition, trees and forests have positive economic benefits for retailers. There is evidence that trees promote better business by stimulating more frequent and extended shopping and a willingness to pay more for goods and parking (Wolf, 2007). Trees and forestlands provide important habitat (foraging, nesting, spawning, etc.) for mammals, birds, and fish and other aquatic species, along with limitless opportunities for recreation, offering a healthful respite from the pressures of work and everyday stress. 11 Introduction Packet Pg. 282 3.2.a Tree Selection related to Location and Other Factors Selecting tree species that are appropriate for the expected functions, maintenance requirements, and locations in which they are planted is important. Generally, native trees should be considered for planting or replacement whenever practical. Along City streets, relatively compact trees that add color and interest, without tending to upheave pavement, are typically desirable. An example is the Bowhall maple, which has been used in numerous street -side locations in Edmonds. When street trees are planted on the same side of the street as SnoPUD overhead power lines, additional caution is needed in selecting appropriate species. These poles also usually carry major communication lines. Such facilities are often located at the very edge of the City's rights -of -way or in planter strips between the sidewalk and the curb. Trees should be selected that do not result in the need for frequent topping or heavy pruning to keep them underneath the communication space on PUD poles, which can be as low as 15 feet above ground level. In large spaces, native coniferous trees may be very appropriate. Some of these species (such as Douglas fir) can grow very tall (up to 200 feet) and wide (30 feet). They are well -suited to the Pacific Northwest climate and have needles year-round. Also, various types of deciduous trees, including maple and oak, may be appropriate in large spaces. In view areas and in many relatively small spaces, lower -growing or less -spreading trees may be a good choice. For example, vine maples have colorful leaves in autumn and at mature height are generally no more than 15 feet tall. However, the branches of this species can spread wide, up to 20 feet. Other species, even fruit trees and small specimen trees, may fit well in settings where tree height or width needs to be limited. In critical areas where wildlife habitat exists, native trees should generally be chosen for planting. Depending on the type of habitat and space availability, such trees could include Western red cedar, Douglas fir, alder, and dogwood. A mix of large and small trees in a park. Introduction 12 Packet Pg. 283 Right tree, right place 3.2.a Factors to consider when selecting a tree to plant. Planting a tree is something that provide a sense of accomplishment and something to admire for decades. However, it is not a decision that should be made without careful consideration. When considering what tree to plant and where to plant it, one should remember the widely used phrase "Right Tree, Right Place." Choosing the right tree depends on many factors including soil type, climate, and the amount of space the tree will have both underground and overhead. It is important to choose a tree that does not require more space in the future than a site can provide. To avoid any conflicts with overhead obstructions (e.g., power lines, utility poles, buildings) or underground obstructions (e.g., pipes, building foundations), consider the tree's height, root growth, and shape at maturity. While above -ground growth is a little easier to envision, a tree needs plenty of room to grow underground too; tree roots can extend up to two to three times the width of the crown (the leaves and branches of the tree). Apart from the physical space available for a tree to grow, one may consider whether the property is in a view shed and how the tree at maturity will impact the views. Trees in streetscapes can grow into conflict with sidewalks. 1. The tree's purpose will impact the suitability of different tree species, whether used for shade, aesthetic beauty, wind protection, screening, or other purposes. 2. Size and location of the tree, including available space for roots and branches, affects the decision on which species to plant. 3. Crown form or shape varies among species, including round, oval, columnar, V-shaped, or pyramidal shapes. Consider how the shape of the tree works in the space available. Note on Native Trees: Edmonds was once covered in forests of old growth Douglas fir, western red cedar, and western hemlock. While these trees were once the right tree in the right place, they often may not be appropriate for urban environments. In natural conditions, a Douglas fir can grow to more than 200 feet in height with a diameter of five to eight feet. While the City's parks and the larger zoned properties (12,000 — 20,000 square foot minimum lot size) primarily located in north Edmonds may provide sufficient growing space for these large native species, they may not be appropriate landscape trees within the Edmonds "bowl area" with its more dense development and view concerns. � 0. Tree roots lifting a sidewalk. 13 Introduction Packet Pg. 284 3.2.a Trees and Views To some people, trees are the view and to others, trees block the view. The City of Edmonds is blessed with magnificent views of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountain range. These views add to the quality of life here, as well as to property values. When views become obstructed, enjoyment of one's property as well as property values may be impacted. The City's Comprehensive Plan has many policies recognizing the protection of public views (views from parks or view corridors down streets and at street ends), but does not specifically address private view protection. Not all areas of Edmonds have views of Puget Sound and the Olympics. While a view shed study of the City of Edmonds has not been completed, the primary view areas are located in the Bowl and the properties on the west facing slopes of north Edmonds. When considering planting trees in these view areas, lower growing trees will help preserve the views of neighboring properties. Topping of trees for views is often the first consideration of landowners. However, topping is not generally recognized as good arboricultural practice. A topped tree requires periodic maintenance to maintain its reduced size. That can become expensive in the long-term. Also, conifers will often form a An example of skirting -up; the lower limbs on this tree have been removed to provide drivers with a clearer view. weakened top as the side branches all try to grow up. In addition, the cut top often becomes an entry site for decay organisms that weaken the tree and increase the danger of a top breaking in high winds. For broad-leaved trees such as maple, madrone or oaks, severe topping is even more damaging. It can seriously harm the tree's health and cause various safety hazards. While views are important, otherfactors such as critical areas must also betaken into consideration. The north Edmonds view shed is associated with significant slopes (potential landslide hazards are slopes 40% and greater) as well as a historic landslide area that has specific regulations that apply to development in that area (Chapter 19.10 ECDC — Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Areas) in addition to critical area regulations. The mechanical and hydrogeological benefits which trees and other vegetation provide to maintain slope stability and reduce erosion are well documented. Tree maintenance activities that maintain the health of existing trees will also help maintain slope stability. A landowner should explore alternative options to tree removal or topping. Below is a list of several trimming practices derived from Vegetation Management: A Guidefor PugetSound Bluff Property Owners (Ecology Public 93-31) which can be used in combination to create views without compromising tree health or slope stability. View -enhancing Pruning Alternatives for Conifers 1. Windowing 2. Interlimbing 3. Skirting -up • Note: In any pruning practice or combination, 60% or more of the original crown should be retained to maintain tree health and vigor. The removal of too much live foliage can reduce the tree's ability to supply food to the roots, thereby weakening them. Windowing. This pruning practice allows a view "window" through the existing foliage of the tree's canopy. In pruning major limbs and c a. c a� aEi ca c M U) 0 U_ c M D w 0 M 0 o� i 0 N a. 2 U_ Q U) c 0 E w c as E U 0 r a Introduction 14 Packet Pg. 285 3.2.a branch whorls, sections that obscure a view are removed. Many people find that this technique creates an aesthetically pleasing effect. • Interlimbing. The removal of entire branch whorls or individual branches throughout the canopy allows more light to pass through, as well as reducing wind resistance of the tree. This practice can be used in conjunction with windowing to improve views. • Skirting -up. Limbing the tree up from the bottom allows a clear line of sight. Instead of an obscuring mass of foliage, the tree trunk is the only object between you and the view. This technique is useful when the tree in question is located high on the bluff face or upon the tableland. Relatively more branches can be removed with this technique because the lower branches contribute less nutrients to the tree than higher branches. Pruning Broad-leaved Trees Pruning and trimming of broad-leaved trees is usually more complicated, especially for trees grown in the wild. Generally, short-lived species such as alder, willow and Bitter cherry are not worth pruning, while trees like madrona, white oak, bigleaf maple, and vine maple will warrant the expense. Crown reduction is one of the most common methods that arborists use to control the size of the tree and keep its shape perfect. This method involves reducing the foliage of the tree while still preserving the general structure of the crown; doing this successfully trims the overall shape of the tree and controls its size. In a general sense, limbs that are located on the uppermost portion of the tree canopy are cut shorter in order to decrease the tree's height. However, they are only removed to the next lateral growth to be able to ensure that they heal faster and grow again properly. It is highly recommended that only 20% or less of the tree's canopy should be cut at once in order to avoid the tree from suffering. Properties owners should consult a certified arborist prior to undertaking any tree maintenance activity. Challenges Developing and caring for a healthy urban forest requires the coordination of many different stakeholders, with a clear vision, and dedicated resources. As such, the urban forest intersects with many other elements of the city. This can result in conflict or challenges including: • Conflicts with Buildings and Infrastructure - Roots and branches of trees can damage nearby sidewalks, utility lines, and buildings. • Hazard Trees - Trees can create hazards to the community. Storm events, accidents, improper maintenance, and the natural death of trees can all create structural weaknesses for trees and the surrounding area. • View Issues - Edmonds is known for the majestic views of the Puget Sound. It is possible for trees to block these views if they grow too large or were planted in improper locations. • Maintenance - Trees are living infrastructure. As such, they require active and regular maintenance. Structural pruning, irrigation, and the management of pests and diseases are some critical maintenance practices that must occur to ensure a healthy and vibrant urban forest. • Choice of Tree Species - Different tree species have different needs, growth patterns, and resistances to pests and diseases. A diverse palette of species improves the resilience of the urban forest. A tree with multiple stems may become a hazard without 15 Introduction proper care. Packet Pg. 286 3.2.a What Do We Have?. To effectively manage the urban forest, it's essential to have knowledge and understanding of what exists today. This section lays the groundwork for the UFMP with historical context, current policies and practices and understanding about the existing state of the urban forest. History of Urban Forestry in Edmonds Trees have been an important part of the City's character and economy since its founding. However, to understand and manage the urban forest has depended upon which trees are being considered and where the trees were located. This is evident from the various locations where trees are referenced in the City code as well as the variety of departments whose staff oversee tree related matters. Edmonds had been designated by the National Arbor Day Foundation as a Tree City USA since 2011, but has had city staff in different departments managing tree issues within the City for decades. Recognizing the role of trees in the community and the necessity to manage them, the City drafted a Streetscape plan in 2002 that included tree planting guidelines as part of the general aesthetic goals of the community. Revised again in 2006 and 2015, elements of this plan introduced tree care policy which has been the source for much of the City's tree management decisions ever since. In 2010, the City formed the Edmonds Citizens' Tree Board to assist in the development of tree ordinances and to encourage the planting and maintaining of trees. This is an early example of the City taking steps towards management of tree resources as an integrated ecosystem of both public and private trees. In 2015, one of the efforts of this board was a proposal to the City for updated tree - related municipal ordinances. These proposed tree codes, through a public comment period, were rejected in part due to public concerns about private property rights, but also because the City felt that it had insufficient tree policy direction to warrant the recommended codes. From these related events, it's clear that the community has assumed an increasing level of care for the urban forest that would benefit from long- term strategic planning. Increasing regulations from the State and Federal Government for environmental stewardship requirements have also played a significant role in defining the level of care for the urban forest that exist in Edmonds today. Of special note are three policy sources that directly influence the management of urban forestry and land use in Edmonds; The Washington State Growth Management Act (1990), the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan (2016), and the Edmonds Parks Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan (2016) (The PROS Plan is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan.) Their backgrounds, roles, and influences on the development and operation of Edmonds urban forest are discussed below. Big trees were common in Edmonds before its settlement. c a c a� E aD c a� 0 U_ c D 0 M to 0 i Cn 0 N IL c 0 w c aD E 0 Q Introduction 16 Packet Pg. 287 3.2.a Growth Management Act (1990) In 1990, the State Legislature adopted the Washington State Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW) on the basis that uncoordinated and unplanned growth posed a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development and the overall quality of life in Washington. Unique among states, the Act requires that municipalities prepare their own comprehensive plans that provide for growth and development in a manner that is locally and regionally consistent, achievable, and affordable. All cities and counties in Washington are required to adopt critical areas regulations by the Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA defines critical areas as: "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: a. Wetlands; b. Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; c. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; d. Frequently flooded areas; and e. Geologically hazardous areas. The state of Washington requires the City of Edmonds to manage and protect it's critical areas. Common ground vegetation in wetland areas Cities are required to include the best available science in developing policies and regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas. Further to that end, jurisdictions must review, evaluate, and, if necessary, revise their critical areas ordinances per an update schedule. Edmonds has an outstanding inventory of critical areas and protection of these critical areas overlaps with the protection of the urban forest. The trees in the urban forest increase soil security to protect wetlands, waterways and flooded areas, and the branches and canopy provide ample real estate for wildlife to call home. It is important that the City plan for all the trees in the urban forest as a whole, not just critical areas. This notion is reinforced in Washington Administrative Code (365-190-060(1)) which specifies when classifying forest land resources that "Cities are encouraged to coordinate their forest resource lands designations with their county and any adjacent jurisdictions. Counties and cities should not review forest resource lands designations solely on a parcel -by -parcel basis." Edmonds has established environmental qualitygoals in support of the legislation and in order to protect critical areas. Since the critical areas regulations must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan sets forth the underlying policies for the jurisdiction's critical areas program. wa Trees help protect the function and benefits from critical areas. 17 what Do we Have? Packet Pg. 288 3.2.a The Comprehensive Plan (2016) As an overarching guiding document, the Comprehensive Plan aggregates other city visions and plans into one cohesive document. The Comprehensive Plan is structured by element, then goals, then policies. The Comprehensive Plan contains 9 elements. These elements include goals and policies that can be directly supported through this UFMP. These are the community sustainability elements of the plan and include goals and policies associated with: • Sustainability • Climate Change Goals and Policies, including support for the Kyoto Protocol and the US Mayor's Climate Change Agreement • Community Health • Environmental Quality The urban forest is a key component of the community sustainability element. Goal A in this element seeks to protect environmental quality and sets the first policy (A.1) as to: Ensure that the city's natural vegetation, especially native vegetation, associated with its urban forests, wetlands, and other wildlife habitat areas are protected and enhanced..." A.2 sets to protect and retain the urban forest, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat areas. This includes techniques such as tree retention, which should be integrated into land use and development codes. As the urban forest grows, so too does the habitat and environmental quality. The community culture and urban design element's implementation involves tree policy as well. In this element, the streetscape section defines the many ways that trees enhance the community: "Trees are an asset to the community. They help absorb stormwater, provide habitat for wildlife, clean pollution from the air, and give both summer shade and aesthetic pleasure." In this way, the Comprehensive Plan addresses the policy commitment to Community Health, through the preservation and expansion of the urban forest. Street trees are further explored in the Streetscape Plan developed in 2002 by the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department and updated in 2006. The Streetscape Plan includes a Street Tree Plan for the downtown corridor. In 2011 the City adopted a "Complete Streets" program which accommodates the needs of all users along streets, including a safe space for pedestrians which necessitates a tree management component. This section concludes with Actions A.1 and A.2, which state that Edmonds should update the Street Tree Plan and develop an Urban Forest Management Plan by the end of 2017. The community sustainability element also includes two other sections that are interconnected with the urban forest; Climate Change and Critical Areas. Recognizing the importance of addressing the issues surrounding the environment and climate change, the City of Edmonds formally expressed support for the Kyoto Protocols, adopted the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement by Resolution No. 1129, and joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) by Resolution No. 1130. A crucial component of these climate change policies is the reduction of greenhouse gases with several benchmarks: 1. By 2020, reduce overall emissions of green -house gases in the state to 1990 levels; 2. By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to twenty-five percent below 1990 levels; 3. By 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or seventy percent below the state's expected emissions that year. The Edmonds urban forest is vital to the success of meeting these benchmarks. Trees reduce carbon through many ways including; reducing energy demand forshaded buildings, acquiringcarbon dioxide for the photosynthesis, and sequestering carbon. The potential for carbon sequestration is determined by maximum tree sizes, lifespans, growth rates, and tolerances to urban stress. Therefore, growing long- lasting and healthy trees directly contributes to the success of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan climate change goals. c a. c a� E a� �a c M U) 4) 0 U_ c M D w 0 M I 0 I o� 0 N a. 2 U_ U) c 0 E w c as E U 0 r a What Do We Have? 18 Packet Pg. 289 3.2.a The PROS Plan (2016) The Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan provides comprehensive guidance on the management and development of Edmonds' parks, recreation and open spaces, and the services provided by the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department. The PROS plan has been regularly updated (1996, 2001, 2008, and 2014) to remain relevant to Edmonds as the city evolves. Edmonds updates the PROS Plan and Community Cultural Plan on a six-yearcycle, in alignmentwith the requirements of the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) to maintain eligibility for federal and state grant programs. To this end, the PROS plan contains detailed data on numerous species and habitats in the city. The PROS Plan is also an important tool in meeting Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements and achieving the important citywide goals outlined in the Strategic Action Plan (April 2015). The PROS Plan defines seven goals, of which Goal 4.0 specifically addresses urban forestry. Goal 4.0 (Natural Resource and Habitat Conservation) seeks to preserve and provide access to natural resources for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education. The eight objectives discuss preserving and protecting areas with critical habitats and natural resources. Of special importance to the UFMP is Objective 4.5, which states "Expand the urban forest and increase tree canopy in Edmonds". Under each goal, the PROS Plan recommends projects and initiatives. A recommended project (4.G) under Goal 4 is: "Steward the urban forest using appropriate maintenance of street and park trees, clear removal and replacement policies and providing information about urban forestry to property owners." This demonstrates the value of the urban forest to the people of Edmonds as manifested through existing official documents addressing the urban forest and urban tree canopy. 19 what Do we Have? Purchasing of Forested Properties The City's policies with regard to the acquisition of open space (including the potential purchase of forested properties) are contained with the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Land acquisition is included in the capital project budget and the PROS plan notes that "expansions of the parks system will target the gaps identified in this plan and take advantage of opportunities as they emerge. Due to the constrained nature of Edmonds, this approach will require vigilance and proactive pursuit of potential land acquisition opportunities for both parks and open spaces. The City's inclusion of this item in the capital projects list recognizes the importance of swift action when rare property acquisition opportunities become available." A specific policy addressing the purchase of forested properties could be considered for adding to the PROS plan to recognize the potential of maintaining the City's tree cover through the selective purchase of forest properties as opportunities arise. Forested properties can be valuable acquisitions to maintain City's tree cover. Packet Pg. 290 3.2.a Summary Considerations for Planning These documents demonstrate the existing regulations and policies within which care for the urban forest is mandated. It is clear from the scope defined within these documents that the values of the Edmonds community, and Washington State at large, require that urban forest management include strategies to improve the care and conservation of all trees. This includes updating the Street Tree Plan, consideration for improving and preserving trees near waterways, critical areas, habitats, and on private parcels. Equipped with this policy background and mandate to manage the urban forest, it's essential to plan with as much knowledge about the community tree resource as possible. •�I The PROS plan (2016) has specific goals for the City to steward the urban forest. Community Tree Resource Trees belonging to the public, in parks, along rights -of - way and around City facilities are the community tree resource. These trees can be the most actively managed population by the City and provide the best indicators to showcase its vision of a well -managed and sustainable urban forest condition. A well -managed urban forest is healthier and more resilient to pests, disease, and climate fluctuations. As a result, a well -managed urban forest is also more cost-efficient. As urban forests evolve over time, managers revise their strategies for individual tree species based on past performance and emerging prospects. Because trees are relatively long-lived organisms, urban forests, like those in Edmonds, are often a combination of well -adapted, high-performance species mixed with some species that may be less desirable and require more attention. There is a widely accepted guiding rule in tree resource management that no single species should represent greater than 10% of the total population, and no single genus more than 20% (Clark et al, 1997). Achieving a diverse population of trees can help to minimize detrimental consequences in the event of storms, drought, disease, pests, or other stressors that can severely affect an urban forest and the flow of benefits and costs over time. Catastrophic pathogens, such as Dutch elm disease (Ophiostoma ulmi), emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) are both examples of unexpected, devastating, and costly pests and pathogens that highlight the importance of diversity and the balanced distribution of species and genera. Current operations in the City that care for the community trees do not keep suitable records of their tree resource to summarize within this UFMP. Publictrees along major arterials or high -profile areas of the City are well-known and routinely cared for by City Staff, but as an overall management tool, the City does not maintain data about these trees as a collective inventory of their green infrastructure assets. Managing for appropriate tree species can help control maintenance costs, reduce damage to infrastructure, and manage the need for pest and disease control measures. c a c a� E a� �a c 0 U) a� L0 U_ c 0 L w L 0 M I 0 o� I 0 N a 2 U_ Q U) c 0 w c as U 0 Q What Do We Have? 20 Packet Pg. 291 3.2.a Tree Canopy Cover The amount and distribution of leaf surface area is the driving force behind the urban forest's ability to produce benefits for the community (Clark et al, 1997). As canopy cover increases, so do the benefits. Tree canopy is the layer of leaves, branches, and stems of trees and other woody plants that cover the ground when viewed from above. Understanding the location and extent of tree canopy is critical to developing and implementing sound management strategies that will promote the smart growth and sustainability of Edmonds' urban forest and the invaluable benefits it provides. In addition to understanding the tree canopy as a whole, the quality of the urban tree canopy is often categorized by the amount of fragmentation. Often, the health and diversity of the overall canopy will vastly improve when there is less fragmented canopy, and there are more linkages between multiple patches of forest. These categories of canopy include: • Core Canopy - Tree canopy that exists within and relatively far from the forest/non-forest boundary (i.e., forested areas surrounded by more forested areas). • Perforated Canopy - Tree canopy that defines the boundary between core forests and relatively small clearings (perforations) within the forest landscape. • Patch Canopy - Tree canopy of a small -forested area that is surrounded by non -forested land cover. • Edge Canopy - Tree canopy that defines the boundary between core forests, and large core forests and large non -forested land cover features, approximately 328 feet. When large enough, edge canopy may appear to be unassociated with core forests. The City of Edmonds completed a canopy assessment in June 2017 using a heads -up digitizing approach and high resolution (4.8 inch), leaf -on aerial imagery captured on August 7th, 2015. The overall assessment does not distinguish between publicly -owned and privately -owned trees because trees provide benefits to the community beyond property lines. The results of the study provide a clear picture of the extent and distribution of tree canopy within Edmonds. The data developed during the assessment becomes an important part of the City's GIS database. It also provides a foundation for developing community goals and urban forest policies. With these data, managers can determine: • The location and extent of canopy over time (tracking changes) • The location of available planting space (potential planting area) • The best strategies to increase canopy in underserved areas • The data, combined with existing and emerging urban forestry research and applications, can provide additional guidance in two ways: • Finding a balance between growth and preservation • Identifying and assessing urban forestry opportunities. An example of perforated canopy in a park setting. 21 what Do We Have? Packet Pg. 292 3.2.a Canopy Cover Summary ♦ 34.1% impervious surfaces, including roads, parking lots, and structures (2,080 acres) The City of Edmonds encompasses a total area of 9.5 square miles (6,095 acres) with 1,844 acres of ♦ From 2005 to 2015 tree canopy decreased from tree canopy (Figure 1). This total area includes 8.9 32.3% to 30.3% square miles of land and 0.6 square miles of water. ♦ Total potential canopy is 57.4%, considering By analyzing high -resolution aerial imagery, Davey suitable planting sites (1,651 acres) and the Resource Group (DRG) determined the following land existing canopy (1,844 acres), for a total of cover characteristics within the City of Edmonds: 3,495 acres ♦ 30.3% existing canopy, including trees and ♦ Private residential properties have most of the woody shrubs (525 acres) canopy (83.0%), followed by public (12.9%), and ♦ 1.6% (99 acres) dry vegetation and bare ground commercial (4.1%) properties. a c ♦ 6.6% (402 acres) open water, where tree canopy ♦ Among parks in Edmonds, Southwest County E is unfeasible Park has the most canopy cover (117 acres) followed by Yost Memorial Park (44 acres) and ♦ 27.4% (1,670 acres) of grass and low-lying Meadowdale Beach Park (26 acres) vegetation L 0 U_ f-YJ' , *ems +� �_ __ ''�+' � ,"'• _ � *�' , . � .. MI to { _ Y LL F+ * y{ l - +ram ,,,, - •�," _ �„ Q Ip :"Mill +f $ �;* r • #'' Jam• •F a ,,f ' r �#+r'1 � . 'f Y•:� a ' err. �:. }.} � � _ Detail image of canopy cover in portion of the Edmonds "bowl" area. What Do We Have? 22 Packet Pg. 293 Land Cover 3.2.a Water 7% Bare Soils 2% Grass/Vegetation 27% Figure 1: Land Cover City Limits Free Canopy CraWLow-Lying Vegetation impervious Surfaces 1 Bare Soil M Open Water 0 0.25 0.5 9 Miles Figure 1: Land Cover 2.3 what Do we Have? Packet Pg. 294 3.2.a Canopy Fragmentation As a part of the UTC assessment, Edmonds' existing UTC was analyzed for fragmentation to discover the distribution of canopy (Figure 3). The overall health 4 _ of the urban ecosystem is highly dependent on the ability of the trees, plants, wildlife, insects, and humans to interact collectively as a whole. Often, the health and diversity of the overall canopy will vastly improve by creating linkages between multiple patches of forest. Canopy fragmentation data serves as a valuable managementtool duetothe importanceof Edmonds' critical areas and environmental stewardship. The + analysis found that Edmonds' urban forest includes the following: • 10.3% 190 acres of Core Canopy c �a a r c a� E aD c ( ) o Figure 2: Fragmentation Comparison U- • 8.2% (151 acres) of Perforated Canopy Wildlife corridors (bottom) link habitats and lead to • 55.5% (1,023 acres) of Patch Canopy improving habitat quality while fragmentation (top) • 26.0% (480 acres) of Edge Canopy leads to isolation and declining habitat quality. o M Ir LL Y 'L • r }•. Y_ ry ; _ O LU E }y _ Ir Detailed image of canopy fragmentation showing canopy categorized as core, perforated, edge and patch forest. What Do We Have? 24 Packet Pg. 295 3.2.a Forest Fragmentation Patch Forest 56% Core Forest 10% or Perforated +' Forest +Few 8% Edge Forest - 26% Ijljll}I Figure 3: Forest Fragmentation ' < IaRPI ti" C44EWOT - Fu3ET OR t f � 77- 'YI »ii ti5A;Jg'I;T ST4 - - LL 5. I4 City Limb Core Forest Edgy* Forst f877iST -r <' Patch Forest k 'ND Perforated forest i N 'l l:liv r[ Qf0 0.25 0.5 1 4AN@ aALIJN0ER WhY MfRes Figure 3: Forest Fragmentation 25 What Do We Have? Q Packet Pg. 296 3.2.a Park Canopy Cover The City of Edmonds includes 47 parks covering 344 acres (5.6% of all land area) (Figure 4). Edmonds' parks have an average tree canopy cover of 44.1%. Within those parks, canopy varied depending on site and size. Edmonds' largest park, Southwest County Park (119 acres), has 117 acres of tree canopy and an average canopy cover of 98.7%. The second-largest, Yost Memorial Park (44 acres) has 41 acres of canopy cover, which represents 93.5% of the land area. The high canopy cover of Yost Memorial Park reflects that it is one of the few areas of native vegetation that remain in Edmonds. The park contains mixed stands of douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), western red cedar (Thuja Canopy cover in Yost Park. plicata), red alder (Alnus rugosa), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), which offer a glimpse into the natural history of the area. Centennial Plaza is the smallest park (less than 0.1 acres) with 0.02 acres of canopy (9.9 % canopy cover). Of the four largest parks (Southwest County, Yost Memorial, Meadowdale Beach, and Pine Ridge), all have high tree canopy potential (greater than 96.7%). However, of these parks, only Pine Ridge Park is not currently near maximum potential canopy. An acceptable strategy is to focus attention on the parks where there is a much larger gap between current canopy cover and potential canopy cover. The 5 biggest parks are listed in Table 7 of this section . c a. c a� E as ca c 0 U) a) L 0 LL r_ M L M L T M m I 0 Os I 0 N a. Q U) c 0 E w c m E z U 0 r Q What Do We Have? 26 Packet Pg. 297 3.2.a Tree Canopy By Park Meadowdale---- Beach Park Table 2: Tree Canopy of 5 Largest Parks Park Name — .. .. Southwest 118.55 117.05 County Park Yost Memorial 44.14 41.28 93.53 97.45 Park Meadowdale Beach Parma 54 25.16 98. 99.77 Southwest c County Park Pine Ridge Park 23.78 21.36 89.83 96.66 (L r c E aD Hutt Park Seaview Park N Sierra Park a) o u_ Hummingbird Hill Park L D Yost Park Maplewood r Park p M Edmonds 1 � (.0 City Park i Pine Ridge Park QI � � Edmonds -- r N Marsh a � a u_ � Q O �- E Under 15% � W 1J4 — Jl!'J4 4 E dry / 30 fO - 45 p/ Ig ++ {y 45% - 0% Q Over 60°la Wes Figure 4: Tree Canopy by Park 27 What Do We Have? Packet Pg. 298 3.2.a Critical Areas The Washington State Growth Management (GMA) mandates that all cities and counties Washington are required to adopt critical ar regulations. The GMA states that critical ar include the following categories and ecosystems: • Wetlands • Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water • Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas • Frequently flooded areas; and • Geologically hazardous areas • Biodiversity and Corridor Areas (Breeding and Refuge) Act in • Nesting Habitat (great blue heron) eas ♦ Sensitive Aquatic Habitat (Trout/Salmon) eas • Sensitive Habitat (bald eagle) Analysis of critical areas in conjunction with tree canopy can reveal the important relationship that trees provide in the conservation and protection of these environments. Two critical area designations are especially important to urban forest management in Edmonds; fish and wildlife habitat areas and steep slopes (Tables 8 & 9). Fish and wildlife habitat areas include high priority habitats and species that have been identified for conservation and management. DRG analyzed the relationship between forest fragmentation and the following priority habitat and species list categories: • Wetlands Area Biodiversity areas and corridors, identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, are areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of nativefish and wildlife. In Edmonds, most of the biodiversity areas and corridors are in core (58.6%) or edge (21.4%) forest. This is congruent with what theory would suggest, because corridors are continuous areas of habitat. Nesting habitat for the great blue heron is comprised of several elements; the nesting colony, year-round and seasonal buffers, foraging habitat, and a pre - nesting congregation area. For a given nesting area, habitats are delineated by a buffer created from the outermost perimeter of great blue heron nests. In addition, there is a larger seasonal buffer to reduce human noise pollution during the breeding months (February - September). Nesting habitat in Edmonds is located primarily in non -forest areas (58%). This value warrants further investigation to determine optimal canopy levels. Table 3: Acres of Sensitive Area by Fragmentation Biodiversity Areas And Corridor 251.82 1.35 53.94 27.09 147.67 21.78 Nesting Habitat Area (Great Blue Heron) 2.55 0.03 0.64 0.00 0.40 1.48 Sensitive Aquatic Habitat Area 118.33 10.52 35.32 4.61 16.53 51.36 Sensitive Habitat Area 77.83 14.46 9.28 0.18 2.70 51.21 Wetlands Area 80.65 5.48 13.56 IlIM 0.51 1.76 59.36 c a. Y c a� E a� �a c M U) 0 LL c M M L D w 0 M I 0 o� I 0 N a. 2 U_ Q U) c 0 E w c m E z U 0 Y Y Q What Do We Have? 28 Packet Pg. 299 3.2.a Sensitive aquatic habitat is determined by in -stream physical characteristics (e.g., temperature, water quantity, structure, substrate conditions, etc.). However, sensitive aquatic habitat is also strongly influenced by watershed processes beyond the waterline. This includes canopy cover, riparian condition, large woody debris, impervious surfaces and stormwater discharge, sediment delivery, road location and maintenance, watershed hydrology, and nutrient dynamics (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2009). In Edmonds, 43.4% of sensitive aquatic habitat is found in non -forest areas. The second largest forest fragmentation category for sensitive aquatic habitat is edge forest (29.9%). Nesting habitat for bald eagles is typically defined by areas of large, mature trees close to large bodies of water and generally buffered from human activity (Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2016). This nesting behavior is reflected in the 11.9% of nesting area located in edge type forests of Edmonds. However, nest trees are often among the largest trees in a forest patch (Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2016). This tree preference is reflected in 18.6% of nesting habitat being found in patch forest. Around wetlands, the Washington Department of Ecology defines vegetated areas adjacent to aquatic resources as buffers that can reduce impacts from adjacent land uses (Washington Department of Ecology, 2011). These buffers also provide some of the terrestrial habitats necessary for wetland - dependent species that require both aquatic and terrestrial habitats. The quality of these buffers could be described by their canopy fragmentation, where 73.6% of wetlands were classified in non -forest areas, and 16.8% were classified in edge forest, with only 2.2% in the core forest. The protection of steep slopes against landslides and erosion is a key benefit of vegetation (Washington Department of Ecology, 2011). Trees provide several benefits to the structural integrity of slopes and the prevention of soil erosion: Foliage intercepts rainfall, causing absorptive and evaporative losses that reduce rainfall available for infiltration. Roots extract moisture from the soil which is lost to the atmosphere via transpiration, leading to a lower pore -water pressure. Roots reinforce the soil, increasing soil shear strength. It is important to understand the significance of steep slopes because of their influences on local wildlife and habitat quality. For example, increased erosion can negatively impact spawning salmon by increasing sediment and particulates in streams and other water bodies. In this way, riparian vegetation that prevents erosion protects critical habitat for wildlife. Most steep slopes (66.1%) are in areas with tree canopy. This figure presents an excellent baseline, as trees are a vital tool for securing soil and minimizing erosion. Among all areas with slopes over 12 degrees, 66.1% of the area is canopy, 14.3% is impervious, 19.0% is pervious, and 0.6% is bare soil. Table 4: Percent of Sensitive Area by Fragmentation Biodiversity Areas And Corridor Nesting Habitat Area (Great Blue Heron) 2.55 1.36 24.96 0.00 15.73 58.01 Sensitive Aquatic Habitat Area 118.33 8.89 29.85 3.89 13.97 Sensitive Habitat Area 77.83 18.58 11.92 0.23 3.47 65.80 Wetlands Area 80.65 6.79 16.81 0.63 2.18 73.60 29 What Do We Have? Packet Pg. 300 3.2.a Considerations for Planting Opportunities Edmonds' existing tree canopy covers 30.3% of the City, and decision -makers can set a target canopy cover goal to pursue. Regardless of the canopy coverage goals established by the City, the following are planting opportunities that may be pursued in order to maintain and potentially increase the existing canopy coverage: • Incentivize tree planting on private property. • Increase canopy with tree planting in areas of patch and fragmented canopy to reduce forest fragmentation and improve wildlife habitat and corridors. Conducting outreach to the community as an important tool for engaging public interest and support. Define goals and identify actions that will support these goal(s). • Develop clear policies and standards to meet the 30% native vegetation requirement codified by ECDC 23.90.040.0 (Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable, Undeveloped Parcels) in undeveloped (or redeveloped) Subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20, that contain a stream or stream buffer, or a wetland or wetland buffer. Park trees in Edmonds. Currently, forestry operations in the City do not document the community tree resource according to industry best management practices. A public tree inventory is important because it provides information on species diversity, forest age, and relative performance of different tree species. An inventory that is maintained with continued updates also facilitates planning and prioritization of tree maintenance duties. Based on this assessment, urban forest managers have the following opportunities: Establish and continually update a public tree inventory. Integrate maintenance cycles with the public tree inventory database. • Study genus/species compositions to ensure best -management diversity recommendations are being followed. What Do We Have? 30 Packet Pg. 301 3.2.a Existing Urban Forest Practices There are three departments within the City of Edmonds that have influence over the management of the urban forest; Development Services (DS), Public Works and Utilities (PW), and Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services (PRC). Although they share and communicate any issues related to tree care and urban forest management, decision -making authority is determined based on the location of the trees. There is no specific staff person or leadership team with overarching responsibilities forguiding the management of the entire urban forest in Edmonds. Tree Maintenance Tree maintenance is important at all stages of tree life, but is especially critical for young trees as they benefit from early structural pruning and training. Minor corrections, such as removing double leaders or crowded branches, can be conducted at ground Table 5: Decision Matrix for Urban Forest Management in Edmonds Locations Department!Tree City Permits for Tree Removal Trees on Private Development Permits for Tree Property Services Pruning Permits for Tree Planting Hazardous Tree Parks, Inspections Trees in Parks Recreation and Tree Pruning g Cultural Tree Removal Services Tree Planting Public Works Hazardous Tree Trees within and Utilities Inspections City Rights -of- (with Parks' Tree Pruning Way assistance in Tree Removal downtown) Tree Planting 31 What Do We Have? level with minimal cost when a tree is young. However, if left unattended, defects can evolve into very expensive structural issues and increase the risk of failure as trees mature, at which point it may be impossible to correct the issue without causing greater harm. Over -mature trees require more frequent inspection and removal of dead or dying limbs to reduce the risk of unexpected failure. By establishing a budget for maintenance, urban forest managers can plan the necessary tree care at the appropriate life stage when it is most beneficial and cost-effective. At the City, tree maintenance is addressed most frequently with reactive tactics. As issues related to trees are identified by City Staff, work is prioritized based on existing and available budgets. Planning associated with tree management on public properties is minimal with priority attention given to ensuring the successful establishment of new tree plantings and responding to hazardous tree conditions. Currently, the Parks Department performs certain routine tree inspections and provides limited proactive maintenance activities (typically associated with the care of trees after planting to encourage successful establishment). Within City rights -of -way, tree issues are uncovered as part of routine safety inspections of sidewalks and streets, where trees are only identified when infrastructure is damaged by roots, or when tree hazards are observed by public works staff. Similarly, in City parks, trees will be prioritized for maintenance when safety concerns are observed through routine park maintenance activities. Parks trees require routine inspections and maintenance for public safety. Packet Pg. 302 3.2.a Tree Maintenance Budgets The majority of tree maintenance costs are accounted for as general line items through the parks department budget. As part of the annual Tree City USA application, departments will summarize their expenses. In 2017, the Edmonds' urban forestry expenditures were $7.74 per capita, which is more than the minimum $2 per capita for Tree City USA designation and more than the $7.50 national average reported by the National Arbor Day Foundation. Documented Edmonds' expenditures have been in the range of $3 per capita in prior years. Using the recent Urban Tree Canopy assessment as a benchmark estimate, Edmonds' urban forest produces about $1,567,000 in environmental benefits and is maintained with a 2017 budget of approximately $319,542. Service Levels To assess current urban forest workload and staffing levels, an estimated 11 city staff members were identified as persons who work with tree issues on at least an intermittent basis every week. From those who are involved with forestry issues or operations on a more regular time basis, 3 individuals were identified with a quantifiable amount of time each week working with trees or tree -related issues. Table 6: 2017 City Urban Forestry Expenditures tone"M11MERTIM Tree Planting and Initial Care $4,848 Tree Maintenance $79,779 Tree Removals $37,565 Management $62,771 Volunteer Activities $134,579 TOTAL $319,542 Budget Per Capita $7.74 UTC Estimate of Benefits $1,567,000 Overall, there is evidence of good interdepartmental cooperation. These general conclusions about the shared responsibilities among staff resources at the City are very important when the City evaluates future staffing needs for urban forestry. Currently, no one single position is designated as a Full -Time Employee (FTE) dedicated to urban forestry. Table 7: Current Urban Forest Workload and Staffing Levels City Services UrbanCommon Related Activities Hours per Development plan review for Permit Intake compliance with tree and Review protection codes 2 Public inquiries (online, phone, and counter) Code Investigating and resolving Enforcement & tree complaints Complaint Investigating and resolving 2 infrastructure damage Investigation complaints Tree planting and Parks & Public establishment Tree Structural pruning on smaller 40-60 Maintenance trees Inspection and identification of hazardous trees Contract Managing contract tree crews 1 Management Emergency Community Service Requests 0 Response Response Management Urban Forest Management Comprehensive Plan stewardship (Long-range) Federal, state grant <1 Planning procurement Tree City USA applications Volunteer events Community Coordinated tree planting Education Action Neighborhood association 1 and Outreach support Website content and public education Tree Board Addressing public issues 1 Meetings related to trees c a. c as E a� M c 0 U) a� `0 u_ c 0 w 0 M �I 0 o� I 0 N a. 2 u_ U) c 0 E Lu c m E t U 2 r Q What Do We Have? 32 Packet Pg. 303 3.2.a Staff Training The science of arboriculture, and the management of urban forests are domains that are increasingly recognized as special areas of expertise. Credentials are increasingly requested by many municipalities as evidence of competency. Bachelor's degrees in Forestry, Urban Forestry, Environmental Sciences, and Horticulture are often the base requirements for leadership roles in urban forest management. Professional credentials can also demonstrate competency, with the most widely accepted credentials in Washington State coming from the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). Image of a tree with a co -dominant branch defect (middle stem). The city has access to trained staff qualified to provide expertise for identification of these tree safety risks. The City provides on -going training to any staff handling tree maintenance equipment, including chainsaw, chipper, and lift -truck safety. Stakeholder interviews revealed that landscape maintenance workers in Edmonds receive no formal training on structural pruning or tree care. The following is a summary description of staff resources and training within individual City departments: • In Development Services, staff are trained to interpret ordinances related to trees, but rely on reports by ISA certified arborists when necessary to render decisions. Staff within development services have backgrounds in Urban Planning and one (1) person with has an advanced degree in Forestry. There are no ISA certified arborists within development services staff. • The Department of Public Works and Utilities has a director with advanced degrees in Biology and Aquatic Biology. In addition, the department has engineers on staff who can successfully consider relevant tree issues in terms of asset and infrastructure management, but tree care expertise is not required for any staff in this department. Tree related issues are resolved based on previous experiences and through hired consultations with ISA certified arborists when necessary. • The Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department has two staff members who provide expertise on urban forestry topics. The first is an ISA certified arborist who is referenced by all City departments and citizen groups for opinions on the best practices associated with tree care. There is also a staff member who has an advanced degree in Forest Ecology who works with citizen groups on tree planting and stewardship projects. Tree Acquisition and Quality Control The City's approach to acquiring trees is not guided by any formal standard practices that ensure the quality of trees during acquisition. As trees are planted, there is no planned follow-up or warranties managed with new trees. 33 what Do we Have? Packet Pg. 304 3.2.a Tree City USA The Arbor Day Foundation is a 501c3 nonprofit conservation and education organization founded in 1972 in Nebraska, United States, by John Rosenow. It is the largest nonprofit membership organization dedicated to tree planting. The Foundation offers Tree City USA certification. Cities can earn Tree City USA certification by meeting four (4) core standards of quality urban forestry management: maintaining a tree board or department, having a community tree ordinance, spending at least $2 per capita on urban forestry, and celebrating Arbor Day. Currently, the City of Edmonds dedicates $319,542.20 towards total community forestry expenditure, and with a population of roughly 41,260, has a per capita investment of $7.74. The Arbor Day Foundation has recognized this per capita investment, as well as recognizing the City of Edmonds' community tree ordinance and observance of Arbor Day. Native Trees Trees native to the Pacific Northwest are well -suited to our climate. They also tend to provide good habit for local wildlife. Many native trees, both coniferous and broadleaved, are part of the City's urban forest. They are currently encouraged in public and private plantings but not necessarily required, except in designated critical areas for wildlife habitat and/or wetlands. More information about native trees and their value is likely to be part of an upcoming round of community education in Edmonds. Cone from a douglas fir. (Photo by Peter Stevens CC BY) An example of some native trees for the Pacific Northwest include the following,: Broadleaved Trees • Big -Leaf Maple • Black Cottonwood • Oregon Ash • Pacific Willow • Red Alder • Vine Maple Conifers • Douglas Fir • Grand Fir • Noble Fir • Shore Pine • Sitka Spruce • Western Hemlock • Western Larch • Western Red Cedar • Western White Pine 1 A more comprehensive list can be found in Appendix F Leaves of a big leaf maple. What Do We Have? 34 Packet Pg. 305 3.2.a Major and Emerging Diseases and Pests Another important aspect to tree maintenance is staying alert to managing emerging diseases and pests that can be costly to control with individual trees. For sustainability of the entire urban forest, addressing both potential and actual problems is critical. Further information on the pests and diseases that threaten the forest ecosystems in Washington can be found at: • USDA's Forest Service website • Pacific Northwest Pest Management Handbook • Collier Arbor Care website —Top 20 Tree and Shrub Problems in the PNW • Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Forest Health Among the many diseases and pests that affect trees, City Staff and residents should remain alert to the following: Diseases • Laminated Root Rot (LRR) is the most important disease affecting Douglas -fir caused by the fungal pathogen Coniferiporia sulphurascens. In young stands regenerated following harvesting, dead or missing trees will be associated with large stumps. These decayed trees will serve as an inoculum source for neighboring trees to become infected, as their roots grow in contact with infected stumps/roots. Fungal growth invades the heartwood and sapwood, resulting in reduced uptake of water and nutrients, with weakened support of the upper portion of the tree. Infected trees are susceptible to windthrow, and there may be trees in a group in various stages of decay and dying. Live trees with LRR display symptoms of shortened terminal growth, sparse foliage, smaller needles, chlorosis (yellowing) and stress cone crops. Trees can fall over before developing obvious symptoms, or die standing. The disease is very difficult to manage in an urban setting (USFS, 2017). • Armillaria Root Rot (ARR) affects the roots of numerous tree species, notably Douglas -fir and other Firs and Pines, as well as many hardwood species. Armillaria ostoyae is the primary fungal pathogen in the Pacific Northwest, although A. mellea can also be involved in tree decline and mortality. ARR disease is usually associated with stress conditions, particularly drought. The fungus survives for many years in infected stumps, roots and organic matter in the soil. Honey -colored mushrooms are typically produced at the base of infected trees in the fall. Typical symptoms include chlorotic foliage, distress cone crops, significant resin flow, decline and death. The fungus typically produces black shoestring -like structures called rhizomorphs on the bark at the base of the tree or in the soil (OSU, 2018). • Verticillium Wilt (VW) is a serious disease of many tree hosts, but is especially problematic on Maple species. Verticillium dahliae is a soil -borne fungus that persists in the soil for decades. The fungus infects roots and grows into the xylem where it colonizes the vascular elements. Its presence (mycelia and spores) plus defense compounds produced by the host clogs the xylem elements, preventing the flow of water and nutrients in the tree. Wilting results, and is exacerbated during periods of drought. Leaves on one side of the tree affected by VW or on one branch suddenly wilt and die. Subsequently, other branches will wilt as the disease progresses. Excised branches will have vascular discoloration which is diagnostic of the disease. Infected trees may survive for years or die within weeks. Once infected, a tree will not likely recover and will require removal. Tree injections of fungicides are not usually effective (OSU, 2018). • Swiss Needle Cast (SNC) is the name of the foliage disease of Douglas -fir caused by the fungal pathogen Phaeocryptopus gaeumannii. SNC is known as a "cast" disease because it causes the premature shedding of needles (or casting) from the tree, resulting in sparse tree crowns and reduced growth. Although it is 35 what Do we Have? Packet Pg. 306 3.2.a called "Swiss" needle cast, the fungus is native to the Western United States throughout the range of Douglas -fir. SNC disease symptoms include chlorotic needles and decreased needle retention, resulting in sparse crowns and reduced diameter and height growth (OSU, 2017). Mortality from the disease is considered rare, but tree care and maintenance of this disease can be expensive and necessary in an urban setting. • Leaf Blight (LB) is a serious disease affecting Pacific Madrone caused by the fungal pathogen Phacidiopycnis washingtonensis. At least a dozen fungi can cause leaf spots and dead areas on leaves; this is probably the most significant cause of damage to the host. Older, lower leaves are infected by spores disseminated by wind or rain during wet weather in the fall. Trees located in creek bottoms, valleys and the forest understory are most susceptible to LB. If wet weather persists, infection may be severe and result in significant defoliation. Under these conditions, the fungus can also infect green shoots. Pruning dead branches to provide better air circulation and raking and destroying fallen leaves will help to reduce fungal inoculum and subsequent infection (OSU, 2008). • Anthracnose (A) affects a wide variety of shade trees, especially Maple, Oak and Sycamore. The closely related fungi Discula (Maple, Sycamore) and Apiognomonia (Oak) are the causal agents of the disease. The disease is favored by warm, wet springs and several rounds of infection can occur, each defoliating the tree, resulting in a tree much more prone to subsequent drought stress. Lesions on the leaves are typically associated and limited by the veins, resulting in discrete necrotic areas. In particularly susceptible trees under ideal environmental conditions, twig cankers can also develop. It is important to rake up and destroy fallen leaves, prune out twig cankers and water trees during dry periods (OSU, 2018). • Sudden Oak Death was discovered in California in the mid 1990's, has spread into southern Oregon (2001) and was found (and has subsequently been contained or eliminated) in a small area in Kitsap County two years ago. The causal fungus Phytophthora ramorum primarily infects species of Oaks, but can also infect a wide range of other hosts, including Camellia, Rhododendron, Blueberry and other landscape plants. The fungus is waterborne and can be spread in streams or other forms of moving water. Symptoms on Oaks include bleeding cankers on the trunk, dieback of the foliage and mortality. Symptoms on other plants can vary from leafspots to leaf blight to twig dieback, but do not usually result in death of the host. Quarantines are in place to prevent further spread of SOD, largely from nurseries (COMTF, 2019). Insects • Asian Long -Horned Beetle (ALB), is an invasive insect that feeds on a wide variety of trees in the United States, eventually killing them. The beetle is native to China and the Korean Peninsula. Signs of ALB start to show about three to four (3-4) years after infestation, with tree death occurring in ten to fifteen (10-15) years depending on the tree's overall health and site conditions. Infested trees do not recover, nor do they regenerate. There are a broad number of tree species this insect will feed in and most common deciduous trees in Edmonds are at risk. • Tent Caterpillar (TC) is a serious defoliator of broadleaf trees and shrubs in most areas of the western U.S. Tree hosts include Red Alder, Cottonwood, Willow, Ash, Pacific Madrone, and many fruit trees. White silky tents appear soon after bud break. As the larvae grow in size, the tents also increase in size. Individual branches near these tents are totally defoliated. Entire trees may be defoliated by TC. After feeding has been concluded, the larvae will turn into moths within a cocoon. Eggs are laid on the twigs and branches where they overwinter in protected masses. Individual tents can be physically removed, preferably in the early morning hours when the larvae are contained in the tent (USFS, 2008). c a c a� a� ca c M U) 0 U_ c M L D w ;a 0 M �I 0 I rn 0 N a 2 U_ Q U) c 0 E w c as E U 0 r a What Do we Have? 36 Packet Pg. 307 3.2.a • Cooley Spruce Gall Adelgid (CSGA) is a serious pest of Spruce and Douglas -fir trees. It swarms in the spring when the new needles emerge. Crawler nymphs form galls at the branch tips. These galls are initially green, becoming red and eventually dry out. These affected branches cease their growth, and if enough branches are affected, the tree may be killed. White cottony specks will also cover the entire branch. Trees with fewer galls may be unsightly and foliage can be discolored and distorted. Most outbreaks of CSGA do not warrant control measures (NRC, 2015). • Pine Bark Adelgid (PBA) feeds on the bark of pines and spruce. They form cottony or wooly masses on the twigs, branches or trunk. Heavy infestations will turn the entire area white. Small trees will be severely affected, resulting in chlorotic needles and stunting or premature death. Small egg clusters are laid in the early spring by the adults. Crawlers move to other areas of the tree or to other trees nearby. PBA can be removed by hand, preferably done when the infestation has just begun (OSU, 2018). • Bronze Birch Borer (BBB) is an emerging pest in western Washington that has migrated from eastern Washington in recent years. Periods of extended summer drought have weakened birch trees and made them more susceptible to this pest which can severely damage or kill the trees. Chlorotic leaves and sparse upper branches are the first symptoms that homeowners usually notice from BBB attack. Close examination will reveal lumpy bark and half -moon - shaped beetle exit holes (WSU, 2008). Symptoms of BBB Include Dying Top 37 what Do we Have? • Douglas -fir Tussock Moth (DFTM) is a moth found in Western North America. Its population periodically erupts in cyclical outbreaks (Wickman et al., 1998). Outbreaks of the Douglas -fir tussock moth appear to develop almost explosively, and then usually subside abruptly after a year or two. The caterpillars feed on the needles of Douglas fir, true fir, and spruce in summer. Forestry management to prevent tree damage from tussock moth outbreaks include four activities: early detection, evaluation, suppression, and prevention. These four activities must be well integrated to ensure adequate protection from the pest. • Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) has killed hundreds of millions of ash trees in North America. The EAB is a destructive, non-native, wood -boring pest that exclusively kills both stressed and healthy ash trees 2-3 years after infestation (NASPF, 2005). EAB is a jewel beetle native to Northwestern Asia. EAB larvae feed on the vascular tissue of trees and populations grow exponentially. This pest has been identified as moving slowly into the Western U.S. and is considered a catastrophic pest for ash tree populations. • Other Diseases and Pests. Information on specific diseases and insects that damage trees in our region have been identified by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Current online information is at: www.dnr.wa.gov/ ForestHealth. A. Asian Long -Horned Beetle B. Bronze Birch Borer C. Douglas fir Tussock Moth D. Emerald Ash Borer Packet Pg. 308 3.2.a Regulatory Framework The City of Edmonds provides regulations for several components relevant to urban forestry in the Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code. These regulations are designed to: • Authorize the power of government to manage the urban forest • Define street trees and, as appropriate, municipal responsibilities for their care • Enumerate tree related fees and penalties • Create regulations associated with tree clearing on private land • Require tree protection during construction • Classify critical areas or buffers These different regulations cover tree related topics on a range of land types, and all influence the direction and management of urban forestry programs. The following summaries outline the chapters and sections of city code. Authorization of Power The legitimacy of Edmonds' city government to manage forestry domains and the definition of those domains fall under the authorization of power: • Chapter 18.45 provides for the City's Planning Division Manager to direct and enforce City codes related to land clearing and tree cutting on public land and private property. It exempts Public Works, Parks and Fire Departments in specific situations where safety is an issue. • Chapter 18.85.030 provides for the Director of Public Works to enforce and inspect work done to maintain City street trees in healthy condition, or remove trees from the public right-of-way as necessary. • Chapter 10.95.030 provides for a Tree Board, made up of Edmonds City residents in order to encourage civic engagement for active stewardship of the urban forest. The powers and duties of the Tree Board are to advise and make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council as appropriate on tree related matters. Street and Public Trees The City of Edmonds is ultimately responsible for the planting and maintenance of public trees. These trees are on public property parcels or select locations in the rights -of -way. Other planting strips are the responsibility of adjacent land owners: • Chapter 9.20.060, for sidewalk construction and maintenance, declares that the responsibility is with the abutting property owner for maintaining or repairing adjacent planting strips. This includes all tree care. • Chapter 18.85 provides further clarity on the regulation of street trees and trees on public property. All street trees are managed by the Public Works Department and require permits for all persons who wish to plant, remove, prune or otherwise change a tree on a street, right-of-way, parking strip, planting strip, or other public place. This code chapter also includes language defining abuse and damage to street trees. Tree Related Fees and Penalties To facilitate compliance and remediation for disregarding public tree codes, the City provides penalties as a punitive deterrent: • Chapter 18.45.070 defines the punitive discretion for trees that are damaged from disregard of City code of up to $1,000 for trees less than 3" and $3,000 for trees larger than 3". Fines can be tripled related to trees in critical areas, buffers, or areas dedicated to public use, including public right-of-way. a What Do We Have? 38 Packet Pg. 309 3.2.a Private Land Clearing Land clearing on private property is often a critical challenge to effectively reaching urban forestry canopy goals. Individual private property rights and objectives of private landowners can frequently be at odds with the community aspirations for the urban forest. • Chapter 18.45 contains regulations associated with trees on private properties for land clearing and tree cutting. This code provides for a variety of purposes that would preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the City and prevent indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees. This chapter also implements policies of the State Environmental Policy Act. It provides special exemptions in 18.45.030 for improved single-family lots, partially improved single-family lots or certain unimproved lots, allowing private property owners in these categories to maintain or remove trees at their discretion without permits. Additionally, these land clearing codes provide exemptions for utility vegetation maintenance or tree work by City departments when situations involving danger to life or property are found. Tree Protection During Construction As new construction occurs throughout the Pacific Northwest, many projects can damage or kill trees. Regulations to protect trees during construction are a mechanism to control canopy loss as sites are developed. • Chapter 18.45 requires that trees that are being retained during a land development project are also protected. The codes describe the protected area on a site as being within the drip -line of the tree and attempts to limit damage to trees by controlling the impact to trees within this area. Critical Areas and Buffers Washington State has special laws to protect critical areas, which are defined for certain types of valuable and environmentally significant areas. Chapter 23.40 establishes extra protections and management requirements for trees located near wetlands, streams, or steep slopes. Tree pruning or removal is restricted or prohibited without a report from an ISA certified arborist, ASCA registered consultant, or a registered landscape architect that documents the hazard and provides a replanting schedule for replacement trees. Challenges One of the more frequent complaints related to tree removal in the city is when properties are developed or subdivided. While a goal of the City's code is that "trees should be retained to the maximum extent feasible," other applicable development regulations help determine what is feasible. There are regulations that prescribe how wide driveways and roads must be, how far the development must be from the edges of a property, location of utilities (water, sewer, gas, and power) that must be installed underground, and stormwater requirements that require the installation of stormwater facilities. As a result, when one of the larger properties in the City that contains a grove of trees is developed to meet the many regulations and needs, sometimes only a few trees are located outside of the development footprint. Trees that were once stable in their grove, are susceptible to wind throw and become hazardous when isolated on their own. Where a tree was once the right tree in the right location (one tree protected in a larger grove), it may no longer be the right tree in the right location (an exposed tree on the perimeter of a lot) following development. As the City considers updates to the development code, updates should provide more ways to encourage greater tree retention when properties are developed. An example may be to provide options for reduced interior setbacks that would allow houses to be clustered and thus provide an opportunity to avoid trees where otherwise development would be placed under the regulations in effect as of early 2019. Another example of an update to consider may include evaluating the required width of access easements. 39 what Do We Have? Packet Pg. 310 Table 8: Summary of Current City of Edmonds Tree Cutting Regulations 3.2.a 0 a U 7 a - Developed single-family property, no critical areas present Developed single-family property, critical areas present Removal of hazard trees in critical area Prune or trim trees Multi -family property and Planned Residential Developments with approved landscape plan Commercial Property Tree removal with development Trees in right-of-way Street trees No review, no permit required Yes, review and permit required if tree in critical area or critical area buffer Review required, but no permit No review, no permit Yes, review and permit required Yes, review and permit required Yes, review included with land use or development permit. Yes, review and permit required Yes, review and permit required Prune or removal of park I No permit trees No notification required, but suggested to avoid unnecessary Code Enforcement Response Tree cutting permit Type II decision (staff decision with notice) Documentation of hazard tree by certified arborist, or clear documentation of dead tree. Replanting required at 2:1 ratio Topping considered same as tree cutting or removal unless retopping of a previously approved topping Design review against landscaping requirements. Type I decision (staff decision, no notice) Design review against landscaping requirements. Type I decision (staff decision no notice) Tree protection measures required for trees to remain A right-of-way construction permit is required for any party other than the City of Edmonds to perform any removal or trimming of trees located within the City rights -of -way Design review against landscaping requirements. Type I decision (staff decision, no notice) The City's Parks Department maintains trees within the City's parks. While no permit is required, tree removal and replacement must be consistent with the Citv's critical area regulations What Do We Have? 44 Packet Pg. 311 3.2.a Regional Urban Forestry Resources Regional urban forestry resources are organizations that provide services to aid in the protection, maintenance, and development of the urban forest. These range from active volunteer groups in the City, to nonprofits, academic institutions, and state and federal government agencies. Some of the organizations and programs described below have been used by the City. Others may be good choices for the future. Edmonds' community volunteers helping to remove ivy and improve forest health. WFOM WASHINGTON COMMUNITY �� Washington State Urban and Community Forestry Program Under the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Washington State Urban and Community Forestry (UCF) Program provides technical, educational, and financial assistance to Washington's cities and towns, counties, tribal governments, nonprofit organizations, and educational institutions. The mission of the UCF is: "To provide leadership to create self-sustaining urban and community forestry programs that preserve, plant and manage forests and trees for public benefits and quality of life." A key service provided by the UCF is its collection of financial assistance programs including; Community Forestry Assistance Grants, Tree City USA Tree Planting & Maintenance Grants, Arbor Day Tree Reimbursements, Landscape Scale Restoration Grants, Scholarships, and Internships. All forms of financial assistance, their availability in a given year, and their associated dollar amounts are dependent on continued funding through annual grant allocations from the USDA Forest Service. The UCF communicates events, educational opportunities, and other information through a Tree Link Newsletter. The Washington Community Forestry Council advises the DNR on policies and programs. The program does this by teaching citizens and decision - makers about the economic, environmental, psychological, and aesthetic benefits of trees. The program also helps local governments, citizen groups, and volunteers plant and sustain healthy trees throughout Washington. The council was established under RCW 76.15. 41 what Do We Have? Packet Pg. 312 3.2.a i FORT&RRA FOR THE PEOPLE. FOR THE LEWD. FOREVER. FORTERRA Green City Partnerships The Green City program helps urban communities in the Puget Sound region effectively steward their natural open spaces through best practices. FORTERRA partners with local municipalities to develop achievable goals, shared visions, long-term plans, and community -based stewardship programs to care for the valuable forests and natural areas in our urban environments. Specific services include: • City-wide forested park and natural area assessment • Strategic and restoration planning • Volunteer program development and guidance • Education and training for volunteers • Restoration tracking systems • Green City outreach and community engagement • On- the -ground stewardship projects and event support The Green City Partnerships share three (3) core goals: • Improve the quality of life, connections to nature, and enhance forest benefits in cities by restoring our forested parks and natural areas • Galvanize an informed and active community • Ensure long-term sustainable funding and community support These unique public/private partnerships bring together public, private, and nonprofit stakeholders to create a sustainable network of healthy forested parks and natural areas throughout the region. Municipal Research and Services Center The Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) is a nonprofit organization that helps local governments across Washington State better serve their citizens by providing legal and policy guidance on any topic. The MRSC collects state and local information from parks and recreation departments, land use planners, utilities, and citizen organizations to promote and manage urban forestry resources. Example resources include local urban forestry programs in Washington State, legal references, and related articles. A deodar cedar provides shade for parked cars. c a c a� E a� �a c M 0 a_ c M w L T M I 0 rn I 0 N d u_ Q c 0 E w c as E z U 0 r a What Do We Have? 42 Packet Pg. 313 3.2.a future wise � Futurewise Futurewise is a nonprofit that has worked to prevent sprawl to protect the resources of communities in Washington State. Futurewise was founded to help support implementation of Washington State's Growth Management Act, and to focus on preventing the conversion of wildlife habitat, open space, farmland, and working forests to subdivisions and development. Futurewise provides data analysis and research, community and environmental planning and policy development, community engagement and outreach, grassroots organizing and advocacy, legislative initiatives, and litigation. These services are all provided through strategic collaboration with businesses, governments, community organizations, and nonprofit partners. Wetland stream flowing through Edmonds. w COLLEGE of the ENVIRONMENT The University of Washington Restoration Ecology Network TThe UW-Restoration Ecology Network (UW-REN) is a tri-campus program, serving as a regional center to integrate student, faculty and community interests in ecological restoration and conservation. Students in the program are required to complete capstone projects, where students of different academic backgrounds work together to complete a local restoration project. Students learn how to plan, design, install, and monitor a restoration project while working in teams. The Capstone spans three academic quarters beginning in the fall. Communities collaborate with the program to develop RFPs, which then provide volunteers for the community and excellent learning experiences for the students. 43 what Do we Have? Packet Pg. 314 3.2.a EarthCorps EarthCorps is a human capital development program where corps members learn leadership skills by working collaboratively, leading community volunteers, and executing technical restoration projects along shorelines, trails, and in forests. Puget Sound Stewards help EarthCorps run restoration events, monitor plant growth, adapt management plans, and educate the community. EarthCorps collaborates with businesses, nonprofits, and communities to offer volunteers who are passionate about conservation and restoration. The Puget Sound Stewards program in Edmonds was created by EarthCorps in 2015 in partnership with the City of Edmonds with support from the Hazel Miller Foundation. The goal was to provide on- Forested park canopy in Edmonds. Forested park canopy in Edmonds. going, locally -based, expert care for one of the City's key natural areas. Starting with Edmonds Marsh, a wildlife sanctuary and rare example of a saltwater marsh in the midst of a city, the program has grown to include three more sites: Brackett's Landing, Willow Creek Demonstration Garden, and Hutt Park. The volunteers who join the Puget Sound Steward program are supported by EarthCorps staff and crews as they learn about the ecology of Puget Sound and how to perform actions that improve the ecological health of project sites in Edmonds that contribute to the health of Puget Sound and Edmonds residents. Actions include removing invasive weeds such as Himalayan Blackberry or English Ivy, mulching areas in need of water retention and weed suppression, and replanting with native plants to foster greater biodiversity. c �a a c a� E aD a� c a� L 0 U_ c D 0 M I to 0 I Cn r 0 N a Q c 0 E w c aD E t 0 r Q What Do We Have? 44 Packet Pg. 315 3.2.a Urban Forestry Practices: Case Studies In order to remain progressive with its urban forestry programs, the City of Edmonds recognizes that there are urban forestry practices emerging from other municipalities that could eventually add value if developed within the City. Through stakeholder interviews and discussions with City Staff, three urban forestry practices were selected as important for further consideration in implementation of this UFMP: Tree Banks (orfee in -Lieu programs), Heritage Tree Programs and Arborist Business Licensing. This section explores some examples around how other cities have adopted these programs. Tree Banks - Fee -based alternatives to tree replacement Often in the course of urban forest management, there can be logistical challenges associated with replacing trees at the same site where trees are removed. An increasingly common solution is to provide developers and residents with the opportunity to pay fees in -lieu of meeting their landscaping requirements. Providing a fee orfinancial guarantee option creates a system for funding tree planting projects or even more sophisticated landscape restoration projects that improve the overall health and condition of the urban forest. Precedence for this option can be found at the National level, with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. In a Federal Rule published in April 2008, The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) define an in - lieu fee program as: • "A program involving the restoration, establishment, enhancement, and/or preservation of aquatic resources through funds paid to a governmental or non-profit natural resources management entity to satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements... Similar to a mitigation bank, an in -lieu fee program sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in -lieu program sponsor." Snohomish County Here, the government provides options for permit applicants to engage the county, their own contractor, or do the mitigation work themselves to ensure that mitigation is achieved, even when it is not possible at the proposed project site: • 'Applicants may choose to perform the off - site mitigation work on private property either themselves or through their own contractor, subject to all other provisions of Section 30.62 SCC, or applicants may enter into a voluntary mitigation agreement with the County pursuant to RCW 82.02.020 under which the County will perform the mitigation work on public property within the same sub -drainage basin or watershed resource inventory area (WRIA)." (POL-6210 REQUIREMENTS FOR PROVIDING OFF -SITE MITIGATION FOR IMPACTS TO CRITICAL AREAS ARISING OUT OF SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION UNDER SCC 30.62.330) The following cities are examples of fee in -lieu programs related to urban forestry. There is some variation in how these fees are calculated, as well as where the funds collected get administered. City of Redmond The City of Redmond calculates fee in -lieu to include the cost of the trees. More importantly, the fee also includes all costs associated with establishment care. From Article IV Environmental Regulations: • RMC 21.72.080 E.2. - Tree Replacement Fee A fee in- lieu of tree replacement may be allowed, subject to approval by the Administrator after careful consideration of all other options. A tree replacement fee shall be required for each replacement tree required but not planted on the application site or an offsite location. i. The amount of the fee shall be the tree base fee times the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements 45 What Do We Have? Packet Pg. 316 3.2.a of this section. The tree base fee shall cover the cost of a tree, installation (labor and equipment), maintenance for two years, and fund administration. The fee shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of a tree removal Permit. Fees collected under this subsection shall be expended only for the planting of new trees in City -owned parks, open spaces or rights - of -way. • http://online.encodeplus.com/regs/redmond- wa/export2doc.aspx?pdf=1&tocid=005.009&fil e=doc-005.009-pid-80.pdf City of Renton The City of Renton has much more limited code language. Fee in -lieu options are still at the City's Community volunteers pulling weeds and improving forest health in Edmonds. discretion, but only cover the cost of the tree and installation. No funding for establishment care is required in this code. However, the code does directly designate the funds to be allocated to the Urban Forestry Program fund, which provides more discretion to the City with how the funds get allocated: • RMC 4-4-130 H.1.E iii. Fee in Lieu: When the Administrator determines that it is infeasible to replace trees on the site, payment into the City's Urban Forestry Program fund may be approved in an amount of money approximating the current market value of the replacement trees and the labor to install them. The City shall determine the value of replacement trees. http://www.codepublishing com/WA/Renton/#!/Renton04/RentonO4O4/ Renton0404130.html What Do We Have? 46 Packet Pg. 317 City of Port Angeles 3.2.a City of Seattle The City of Port Angeles provides a fee in -lieu option, but it only appears to relate to street tree replacement requirements. Another distinction in this code is the fee is determined by the Community Forester (a city staff position): • PAMC 11.13.050 B.3. Street tree requirements in previously developed area. In addition to the above requirements, the following also apply: Where new street trees cannot be planted due to portions of rights -of -way having been previously paved or otherwise rendered unsuitable to plant trees, a fee -in -lieu of planting is required. Such fee shall be determined by the Community Forester per City Policy and deposited into the Community Forestry Fund. https://library.municode.com/wa/port_angeles/ codes/code_of ordinances?nodeld=TIT11STSl_ CH 11.13STTR_11.13.050STTREN RE Heritage Tree Programs - Recognizing Historical Significance of Trees In many cities around the nation, trees are often recognized for their historical significance to the community. This recognition is commonly referred to as part of a Heritage Tree Program. These programs provide communities with a way of officially recognizing trees, and with the recognition, can offer a variety of benefits to the community, including: • Increasing public awareness of trees and the urban forest • Drawing attention to and protecting unique and significant trees • Reinforcing how trees are a key component of a city's character and sense of place • Engaging citizens with the purpose and activities of a city's urban forestry program • Encouraging public participation in the identification and perpetuation of heritage trees throughout the City In the greater Puget Sound region, a number of cities have heritage tree programs. One of the earliest programs was for the City of Seattle in 1996 when PlantAmnesty (a nonprofit) initiated a program that eventually became co -sponsored by the City. Seattle's program provides the broadest set of categories for designating a tree as a heritage tree. Trees can be designated according to the following categories: • Specimen: A tree of exceptional size, form, or rarity. • Historic: A tree recognized by virtue of its age, its association with or contribution to a historic structure or district, or its association with a noted person or historic event. • Landmark: Trees that are landmarks of a community. • Collection: Trees in a notable grove, avenue, or other planting. City of Vancouver The City of Vancouver, Washington, has had a heritage tree program in place since 1998. Unlike Seattle, which already regulates the care of exceptional trees (including heritage trees) on private property, the City of Vancouver uses this designation to protect trees on private properties where tree removal permits would not ordinarily be required. This is a voluntary program for private property owners, thus protecting the rights of the property owner (https://www.cityofvancouver.us/ publicworks/page/heritage-trees). City of Lynnwood Closer to Edmonds, in the neighboring City of Lynnwood, the Heritage Tree program is defined in municipal code. Although many aspects of this program are similarto other cities, their specific code language binds all successive owners of the tree to the protection obligations within this designation. This language has the added benefit of ensuring long-term protection and care for the tree unless it is determined to be a hazard (LMC 17.5.070). 47 What Do We Have? Packet Pg. 318 Arborist Business Licenses - 3.2.a City of Lincoln Ensuring Best Practices in Tree Care Businesses that operate in Edmonds only require a general business license to work as an arborist. This is not uncommon, but many cities are now recognizing how the complexity of city codes associated with tree care and the expectations of the community necessitate special licensing for businesses that perform tree work. Tree care industry professionals and researchers in the science of arboriculture routinely convene as the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), or the Tree Care Industry Association (TCIA). These groups collaborate to encourage best practices in tree care and tree worker safety. To help ensure a community has companies that are adequately trained and qualified for tree work, the use of arborist licensing that ties the business with these organizations is increasingly popular. The following cities were selected from throughout the U.S. as examples of different approaches for arborist business licensing: City of Herrington • Herrington, KY — Businesses that practice arboriculture must submit an application to the City for a Tree Contractor license. The application identifies the business as practicing arboriculture and requires proof of sufficient insurance (http://www.cityofherington.com/ pview.aspx?id=32514&catl D=547). Jim Community engagement on urban forestry is important to encourage tree retention on private properties. • Lincoln, NE — In Lincoln, applications for tree services and arborists not only require proof of insurance, but also proof of ISA credentials or a tree worker test administered by the parks and recreation department. http://Iincoln.ne.gov/ city/parks/communityforestry/arborist.htm City of Denver • Denver, CO — Denver has two classes for their "Tree Service License." This is a distinct feature of their licensing process. Licenses can be issued to businesses working on "Large Trees," which require workers to leave the ground, or an "Ornamental" license, designed for companies doing landscaping work on small trees that do not require an aerial lift. https:H www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/ Portals/747/documents/forestry/tree-license- info-packet.pdf City of Spokane • Spokane, WA — Spokane has a commercial tree license that businesses must secure if they are doing work on public property trees (e.g.,street trees and park trees). https://my.spokanecity. org/urbanforestry/permits/ What Do We Have? 48 Packet Pg. 319 3.2.a Incentives - Encouraging Tree Retention on Private Properties From the urban tree canopy assessment, it was determined that the majority of tree canopy in the city is privately owned and managed. For cities to manage their urban forests, collaboration and voluntary commitments on the part of private property owners can be a beneficial strategy that encourages desirable tree care and retention practices. (Note: In some "incentive programs," cities have first established by code minimum tree density requirements for private properties and then used incentives to allow property owners some flexibility in retaining the minimum tree density). The following are example methods that cities, counties, and states have used to incentivize desirable tree stewardship on private property: City of Portland Portland, OR — The City of Portland has a "Treebate" program which provides a one-time credit on individual utility bills for planting a tree in a residential yard. The amount of credit depends on the size of the tree. (Certain types of trees are excluded from the program.) https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bes/ article/314187 Brevard County • Brevard County, FL— In Brevard County, incentives were created to encourage tree preservation as they relate to landscaping requirements during development. This code language incentivizes by providing credits for exceeding tree canopy density, preserving native trees of significant size, or vegetation of special concern. These credits reduce the tree re -planting requirements otherwise associated with development projects. (Code Sec 62-4344). http://brevardcounty.elaws.us/code/coor_ptii_ appid32777_ch62_artxiii_div2_sec62-4344 City of Rocklin • Rocklin, CA — In an effort to preserve its native oak population, the City of Rocklin established incentives in their code. Projects that save 25% or more of the surveyed oak trees receive expedited processing by the Community Development department. In addition, development projects can have traffic mitigation and capital facility fees deferred from 3 months up to 12 months depending on the trees being saved. http://www.rocklin.ca.us/ sites/main/files/file-attachments/oak_tree_ preservation_guidelines.pdf State of Hawaii State of Hawaii — In an effort to encourage the care and maintenance of trees determined as "exceptional", residents can deduct up to $3000 per tax year for their costs associated with tree care. The code language has an additional limitation that this tax deduction can only be allowed once every three years. (HRS 235-19). http://files.hawaii.gov/tax/legal/hrs/hrs_235.pdf When the City of Edmonds updates its development regulations, incentives for tree retention and tree planting should be considered. These may include: Tree bank Tree bank funded by development. Developer pays X dollar for each significant tree removed during development into a tree bank. This "incentivizes" tree retention because the developer may find ways to maintain trees rather than pay into the tree bank. • Tree bank could be used to supply property owners with certificates to purchase trees to plant on their property. Tree bank funds could be used towards purchase of forested properties when they become available. 49 What Do We Have? Packet Pg. 320 3.2.a Development flexibility to maintain trees • Allowing reduced interior setbacks may allow more flexibility in home placement and provide opportunities for tree retention. • Allow for deviations from access and road width requirements to allow more flexibility in design and home placements. • Encourage low impact development techniques which promote tree retention. Heritage Tree Program • Develop a voluntary Heritage Tree Program to recognize unique or special trees as a way to recognize stewardship of the urban forest by local property owners. Further consideration of the above —and any additional —ideas should be explored in more detail as part of the code update process in the near future. Summary Considerations for Urban Forest Practices Historical practices and regulatory requirements provide a clear vision and mandate that direct the City to manage the entire urban forest. In particular, the City has special authority over property it owns or that is within the public right-of-way. Yet, no comprehensive public tree inventory exists. The City also does not have a dedicated forestry specialist to direct the City's urban forest management activities. Instead, the City has multiple departments that are guided by codes and policies for site -specific decisions without overarching strategic level guidance of the forest. An example encountered by public works staff is when a tree removal is being considered. One tree may need to be removed and replaced for safety reasons, but additional trees may get removed and replaced to maintain the aesthetic of the streetscape. Without overarching urban forest strategies, removals of trees for simple rights -of -way improvements can be seen as reactive solutions resolved through political discourse instead of planned practical decisions for city managers. This reactive approach to urban forest management also extends to the tree care budget. The City does not maintain sufficient tree related information (such as tree quantity or condition data) to budget for proactive tree care. Current urban forestry benefits models show how trees in Edmonds provide environmental and economic benefits that are much greater than their reactive management costs. There is tremendous opportunity to leverage this disparity and direct forest management toward proactive tactics such as tree planting, young tree maintenance pruning, and tree inspections. With approximately 13%ofthe City's entire tree canopy in public ownership, other methods to encourage or require tree planting/protection will be needed for the community to have influence over tree care in the remaining 87% of the forest. Some strategies that have been engaged in at other municipalities include the fee in -lieu programs to support variances in any tree replacement obligations, Heritage Tree Programs that protect special trees, and arborist business licensing to encourage best practices in tree care, and incentive programs. The City's policies with regard to the acquisition of open space (including the potential purchase of forested properties) are contained with the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Land acquisition is included in the capital project budget and the PROS plan notes that "expansions of the parks system will target the gaps identified in this plan and take advantage of opportunities as they emerge. Due to the constrained nature of Edmonds, this approach will require vigilance and proactive pursuit of potential land acquisition opportunities for both parks and open spaces. The City's inclusion of this item in the capital projects list recognizes the importance of swift action when rare property acquisition opportunities become available." A specific policy addressing the purchase of forested properties could be considered for adding to the PROS plan to recognize the potential of maintaining the City's tree cover through the selective purchase of forest properties as opportunities arise. Finally, the City of Edmonds has both public and nonprofit agencies committed to helping Edmonds maintain a healthy urban forest. With continued and greater engagement, the City may realize more grant -funded opportunities, volunteer resources, and engaged citizens who will help the City achieve its urban forest management goals. c a c as E a) �a c M U) 4) 0 U_ c M w 0 MI 0 I o� 0 N a U) c 0 E w c as E M U 0 r a What Do We Have? 50 Packet Pg. 321 3.2.a What Do We Want? Stakeholder and Community Input Edmonds conducted substantial outreach to public stakeholders, residents, and nonprofit agency stakeholders. Connections and relationships that develop among stakeholders are valuable outcomes of the urban forest outreach process. This provided a wide context for the challenges that face Edmonds' urban forest. As community awareness and actions associated with urban forestry move forward, it will be the people of Edmonds that ultimately realize the value of their contributions to their community in the trees that grow around them. Stakeholder Interviews In the summer of 2017, a team from the Davey Resource Group and Nature Insight Consulting met with several municipal and regional urban forest stakeholders. These stakeholder interviews occurred over two days and included urban planners, utility experts, public works staff, tree board representatives, and City staff leadership. Their valuable contributions guided the framework of the UFMP. Virtual Open House Throughout the development process, the City hosted a website that provided community access to the planning process. In addition, the website provided access to videos of public presentations, surveys, and invitations for public comments. This approach provided further opportunities for public input outside of scheduled community meetings. Community Meetings The first public meeting was held with the City of Edmonds Citizens' Tree Board on May 4, 2017. During this meeting, issues, concerns, and values about the urban forest were explored with members and visitors in attendance. Later, on June 22, 2017, the City of Edmonds hosted the first of two open houses (Appendix D) at City Hall to share information about the UFMP development process and gather input from community residents. The open house included a presentation and a brief discussion with the audience to answer clarifying questions. Following the presentation, attendees were invited to provide input (thoughts, ideas, concerns, questions) on six opinion poster boards. Each poster board contained a broad topic followed by initial suggestions generated through the prior stakeholder interview process. Attendees were invited to express their opinions using dots (where green = a positive "vote"/ agreement for the suggestion, yellow = concern/ hesitation of the suggestion, and red = a negative "vote"/disagreement or dislike of the suggestion). Attendees were invited to use as many dots of each color as necessary to express their opinion of each suggestion on each poster board. In addition, each poster board provided an area for Additional Suggestions, where attendees were invited to write down their thoughts, ideas, concerns, and questions on a sticky note. The sticky note was then adhered to the poster board for other attendees to review and "vote" on. A third meeting which was with the Planning Board, occurred on July 26, 2017 as another opportunity to solicit public participation early in the UFMP development process. The results of these public meetings helped the City to understand the needs and concerns of the community and guide the development of the online survey. 51 what Do we want? Packet Pg. 322 3.2.a Tree board meetings in Edmonds provide pathways for community engagement. What Do We Want? 52 Packet Pg. 323 3.2.a Online Community Survey As part of the initial stakeholder outreach, a survey was developed with the intention of understanding and benchmarking Edmonds' community values and views on the urban forest. It was not conducted as a statistically valid study but as one to guage community values and get public feedback. Survey data was collected online. The survey platform only allowed one survey response per household to control for multiple entries from a single respondent. The survey closed in September of 2017 with 175 responses having been gathered through the summer (Appendix C). Responses increased following the public open house and a presentation to the planning board. Although the intent was to gather feedback from a broad representation of the community, 40.9% of the respondents affiliated themselves with the Edmonds Bowl area, with another 15.2% affiliating with the Seaview neighborhood. Other neighborhoods had less than fifteen (15) responses each, about 29.3% of the combined total. 14.6% (24 responses) did not affiliate within the survey -defined neighborhood groups. The results showed how seventy-five percent (74.9%) of respondents "strongly agree" that public trees are important to the quality of life in Edmonds. Sixty-seven percent (66.9%) of respondents "agree" or "strongly agree" that Edmonds needs more public 40 % 35% 30% 25 % 20 % 15% 10% Edmonds' fountain and traffic circle trees. trees. The most popular location for more trees is in open space and natural areas (60.4%), followed by parks (59.2%), streetscapes (59.2%), then trails and bike paths (45.6%), downtown (42.6%), and golf courses (11.2%). When asked to rank the environmental benefits most valued from the urban forest, respondents expressed the greatest appreciation for air quality benefits, with 36.6% indicating that it is the most important benefit, followed by wildlife habitat, and water quality. Energy savings were ranked as least important at 4.6% (Figure 4). Figure 5: Most Valuable Environmental Benefit 0% 0/ Improved Air Quality Wildlife Habitat Protect Water Carbon Storage Energy Savings Other Quality/Reduced Stormwater Runoff Environmental Benefits 53 what Do We want? Packet Pg. 324 3.2.a View of street trees at 5th Avenue South and Main Street. On average, respondents ranked the beauty of trees as the most important intangible benefit, followed by shaded trails, sidewalks, and bike trails, then 40 35 30 25 20 15% 10% attractiveness to residents. The benefit of shaded parking was ranked as the least important aesthetic benefit (Figure 5). Figure 6: Most Valuable Intangible Benefit 50 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 0/o Beauty/Aesthetics Shaded Attractive to Shaded Improve retail Increased Property Passive recreation Shaded Parkin Trails,sidewalks, Residents streets/Buffer areas and Values and bike trails from vehicles neighborhoods Intangible Benefits c �a a r c 0 E a� R c a� L 0 LL L r L T c'M CD 0 I Cn 0 N a Q c 0 E w c aD E t r Q What Do We Want? Packet Pg. 325 3.2.a In general, respondents are satisfied with the current level of maintenance, with 69.8% saying they "Agree" or "Strongly Agree." When asked to rank various options for the level of maintenance that public trees should receive, 52.1% of respondents indicated their preferred expectation is for trees to receive hazard maintenance (Figure 6). Fifty-four percent (53.9%) of respondents would like to seethe City help preserve trees on private property. Education and outreach were considered the best ways to encourage tree planting and preservation on private property, with 79.0% of respondents identifying these as their preferred methods. Respondents were asked to select the types of education and public outreach they would like to see offered by the urban forestry program. The most popular educational materials were website resources (62.7%), followed by interpretive trails and displays (59.8%), guided nature and tree walks (55.0%), and informational brochures (43.2%). 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Take care of hazardous trees. Street tree along Main Street. Figure 7: Maintenance Expectations Holistic Plant Health Care (Improve the urban forest, but not necessarily every tree) Best possible care (all trees Clearance only (keep the None -Keep them natural should look good) sidewalks and streets clear) Maintenance Expectations 55 What Do We Want? Packet Pg. 326 3.2.a Summary Considerations for Public Outreach Already considered a valuable asset by Edmonds residents, Edmonds has an opportunity to further improve the urban forest through increased public outreach and community engagement. Public engagement on urban forestry issues has demonstrated that the public is generally satisfied with the City's activities on public property, but prefers to have the City only provide guidance and education as opposed to regulation when it comes to stewardship of trees on private property. There is general agreement from survey respondents that trees impact views for many residents, and the issue galvanizes residents as a primary tree issue in Edmonds. In fact, views of the water and other scenic places are fundamental to Edmonds' identity as a community. Scenic views are also considered a property right of long-established development. At the same time, appreciation of trees —especially "the right trees in the right place" —is a value shared by almost everyone. Private property trees have canopy that can shade public streets. Street trees along 5th Avenue. c a. c as �a c M U) W 0 LL c M L D w T M m I 0 Os I 0 N a. Q U) c 0 E w c m E M U 0 r Q What Do We want? 56 Packet Pg. 327 3.2.a How Do We Get There? Over the next twenty (20) years, the City of Edmonds will be able to enhance management of the urban forest through implementation of actions recommended in this Plan. The decision to develop a Plan with a 2038-time horizon was primarily based on the precedence established by the City with other long-range planning documents. Additionally, growing and improving Edmonds' urban forest are slow processes. Tree physiology for most trees in Western Washington can take up to seven (7) years to establish after planting, and anotherten (10) years before they reach functional maturity. Trees provide the majority of their ecosystem services when they reach functional maturity. For this additional reason, it is essential that urban forest planning consider at least twenty (20) years within the Plan framework as a reasonable expectation for achieving the desired state of the urban forest. The five (5) long-range strategic goals provided in this Plan will guide actions and activities that address the three components of a sustainable urban forestry program: • Urban Forest Asset Actions, which are intended to improve the urban forest resource over the next twenty (20) years by developing detailed expectations for the urban forest. To accomplish this, most activities will increase the amount of information the City maintains about its urban forest resource. This includes activities like routine tree canopy assessments and a public tree inventory, both of which are fundamental to management and are substantial expenses to an urban forestry program requiring significant consideration. • Municipal Resource Actions, which are intended to drive improvements in City policy and practices by developing efficiency and alignment of efforts within City departments. The common activities for accomplishing these goals center around developing policies that promote routine tree inspection and formalized tree management strategies for City -owned trees. The results will encourage the City to improve its awareness and mitigation of tree hazards and eliminate barriers to effective urban forest management. • Community Resource Actions, which are intended to build stronger community engagement and public participation in urban forest stewardship. The activities coordinate with the public and encourage the participation of citizens and businesses to align with the City's vision for the urban forest. The research into current and historical efforts in urban forestry at the City has revealed numerous opportunities for Edmonds to enhance the understanding of the urban forest resource as well as improve efficiency in tree maintenance operations. The criteria and indicators proposed by Kenney, et al. (2011) were used as a standard to assess the current urban forestry practices in the City, and provide the management reference necessary to frame the following recommended goals for this plan. Each action contains time designations which estimate the anticipated timeframe for completion of the action/activity once it is started. 57 How Do We Get There? Packet Pg. 328 3.2.a Scenic views of the Puget Sound from Edmonds. Trees can obstruct the view, but can also be the view. r.. How Do We Get There? 58 Packet Pg. 329 Urban Forest Management Plan Goals Goad 1 Time Goal 1- Maintain or enhance citywide canopy coverage The city has limited information about the condition of the urban forest. Success with this objective will be achieved with enhanced management of public trees and a deeper understanding of the population of trees on private property. The following actions will support this objective: A. Update tree regulations to reduce clearcutting or other development On -going impacts on the urban forest and to consider changes to tree replacement requirements and penalties for code violations B. Adopt policy goal of no net loss to overall tree canopy and continue to 1 Year enhance canopy in parks according to the PROS plan. C. Ensure protection of tree resources in environmentally critical areas On -going D. Develop a voluntary heritage tree program 3-5 Years E. Enforce city regulations on tree cutting On -going i. Reach out periodically to tree maintenance and landscaping firms to make sure they know Edmonds' requirements for pruning or removing trees F. Establish a tree bank or fund to which donations can be made for tree 3-5 Years planting and other tree programs i. Use any penalty fees from tree cutting violations to fund tree programs G. Support sustainable ways to combat pests and disease that threaten trees On -going H. Consider need for dedicated City arborist On -going I. Report at least every 10 years on canopy coverage 10 Years, On -going J. Periodically review and, if needed, update Urban Forest Management Plan 5-10 Years, On -going (generally, every 5-10 years) 59 How Do We Get There? Packet Pg. 330 Urban Forest Management Plan Goals Goal 2 Time Goal 2 - Manage public trees proactively The city has identified opportunities within this plan to improve its risk management associated with trees and create better pathways for community engagement. The following actions will support this objective: A. Use best available science in caring for the urban forest on City properties On -going and ROW B. Have adequate resources (staff, contractual help, training, or other) to On -going monitor the health of public trees and make decisions on their care C. Develop and maintain an inventory of trees in key public places (for example, On -going along certain City streets or trails) to document tree condition and risk D. Update the Street Tree Plan periodically 5-10 Years, On -going E. Support removal of invasive plants, such as ivy, where they threaten the On -going health of public trees F. Coordinate among departments on tree issues and identify lead City staff On -going person to guide approach and activities G. Develop and implement a tree planting plan on City property and ROW to 3-5 Years, On -going help ensure: i. Age and species diversity; ii. And suitability of species to location H. Implement a program of regular maintenance and pruning for City trees, 3-5 Years, On -going consistent with best management practices I. Lead or facilitate volunteer activities for tree planting/care on City property 1 Year, On -going and rights -of way J. As part of City -sponsored capital projects, provide funding for appropriate On -going trees in rights -of -way and on City properties K. Provide an annual report to the City Council on tree planting/management On -going for City properties and right-of-way (ROW) How Do We Get There? 60 Packet Pg. 331 Urban Forest Management Plan Goal 3 Goal 3 - Incentivize protecting & planting trees on private property To ensure success with enhancing the tree canopy, the city recognizes that voluntary public participation must be encouraged. The following actions will support this objective. Goals J Time A. Have a program of giving away trees and/or tree vouchers for use in Edmonds 3-5 Years, On -going B. For properties that retain a certain amount of tree canopy cover, explore establishment of: i. A property tax "rebate" applicable to the City portion of property taxes; and/or ii. A stormwater utility fee reduction; and/or iii. Other techniques that provide a financial recognition of the benefits of tree planting and protection. C. Develop a certification/awards program to publicly recognize property owners that maintain a certain amount or type of healthy trees 3-5 Years, On -going 1 Year, On -going 61 How Do We Get There? Packet Pg. 332 Urban Forest Management Plan Goal s Goal 4 Goal 4 - Provide resources to the community to educate/inform on tree planting and care The city recognizes the importance of the privately managed tree population in the city and recognizes the opportunity to support community stewardship. The following actions will support this objective: A. Provide signage or other information about significant public trees B. Provide for Tree Board, especially to: i. Develop community education materials; ii. Participate in or initiate tree planting and tree care activities, including outreach to citizen volunteers Time 1 Year 1 Year, On -going iii. Report annually to the City Council on Tree Board activities C. Develop and disseminate information for the public on the value of trees 1 Year, On -going and to provide guidance on tree selection and management How Do We Get There? 62 Packet Pg. 333 Urban Forest Management Plan Goals Goad 5 Time Goal 5 - Promote "Right tree, right place" Ultimately, the urban forest will be sustainable when o balanced combination of long-lived native trees and nursery grown street trees ore growing in suitable spaces to maintain views, support wildlife (pollinators, birds, mammals, etc) and provide optimum environmental services. The following actions will support this objective: A. Make readily available lists of compatible trees for planting in various kinds 1 Year of local settings i. Indentify: large native tree species that can spread out in large spaces; low -growing trees in view corridors, trees with appropriate root systems near sidewalks and underground pipes. ii. Provide lists of suitable trees to support pollinators and backyard wildlife habitat. B. Identify key areas to increase canopy and: 1-3 Years i. For any such private properties, encourage appropriate tree planting or other techniques; and ii. for any such public properties, consider and take action to appropriately plant trees or otherwise increase canopy. C. Identify and plan for the care of unsuitable trees and, as necessary, for On -going pruning or removal when they are potentially damaging to people, buildings or infrastructure D. Ensure that development regulations require native trees and vegetation On -going to be planted in critical areas, especially near streams and other wildlife habitat areas E. In updating the Street Tree Plan, identify specific species of trees that should 1-2 Years be planted to be compatible with the street environment 63 How Do We Get There? Packet Pg. 334 3.2.a How Are We Doing? Monitoring and Measuring Results The UFMP includes goals and actions for measuring the success of planning strategies. It is intended that the Plan serves as a living document. As new information becomes available, this section of the UFMP will be reviewed and amended using routine plan updates, annual reports, and community satisfaction surveys. 5-10 Year Plan Update (Plan 2023) The UFMP is an active tool that will guide management and planning decisions over the next twenty ( 20) years. The goals and actions will be reviewed every five to ten (5 -10) years for progress and integration into an internal work plan. The UFMP presents a long-range vision and target dates are intended to be flexible in response to emerging opportunities, available resources, and changes in community expectations. Therefore, each year, specific areas of focus should be identified. This can inform budget and time requirements for Urban Forest Managers. Annual State of the Urban Forest Report This report, delivered annually, should include numbers of trees planted and removed by the City, and any changes to the overall community urban forest. It will serve as a performance report to stakeholders and an opportunity for engagement. The report is also an opportunity to highlight the successful attainment of UFMP actions as well as to inform stakeholders about any issues or stumbling blocks. This information can be integrated into urban forest managers' Annual Reports and used to pursue additional project support and funding from state agencies and Tree City USA applications. Community Satisfaction The results of the UFMP will be measurable in improvements to efficiency and reductions in costs for maintenance activities. Attainment of the goals and actions will support better tree health, greater longevity, and a reduction of tree failures. However, perhaps the greatest measurement of success for the UFMP will be its ability to meet community expectations for the care and preservation of the urban forest resource. Community satisfaction can be measured through surveys as well as by monitoring public support for realizing the goals and actions of the Plan. Community satisfaction can also be gauged by the level of engagement and support for urban forest programs. An annual survey of urban forest stakeholders will help managers ensure activities continue to be aligned with the community's vision for the urban forest. c a c m E as c N L 0 U_ c L 0 0 T M i 0 i 0 N a 2 U_ _ c 0 E w c as E r a How Are We Doing? 64 Packet Pg. 335 3.2.a Appendices Appendix A: References Akbari, H., D. Kurn, et al. 1997. Peak power and cooling energy savings of shade trees. Energy and Buildings 25:139-148. American Forests, 2007, http://www.americanforests.org Bennett, M. and Shaw, D. 2008. Diseases and Insect Pests of Pacific Madrone. Forest Health Fact Sheet EC 1619-E. California Oak Mortality Task Force, 2019. https://suddenoakdeath.org. Casey Trees and Davey Tree Expert Company. The National Tree Benefit Calculator, 2017. http://www.treebenefits.com/calculator/ CensusScope, 2012, "CensusScope: Your Portal to Census 2000 Data." www.censusscope.org Ciesla, WW.M. and Ragenovich, I.R. 2008. Forest Insect & Disease Leaflet 119. Western Tent Caterpillar. USFS. City of Edmonds, 2015, Edmonds Streetscape Plan, Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services. City of Edmonds, 2016, Citizens' Tree Board. City of Edmonds, 2016, Comprehensive Plan, City of Edmonds Department of Development Services, Planning Division, Edmonds, Washington. City of Edmonds, 2016, Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Plan, Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services. City of Edmonds, 2017, Urban Tree Canopy Assessment Report, City of Edmonds Department of Development Services, Edmonds, Washington. City of Seattle, 2012, http://www.seattle.gov/parks/ProParks/ Clark, James, N. Matheny, G. Cross, V. Wake, 1997, A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability, Journal of Arboriculture 23(1): January 1997. Colorado State University Extension, 2003, Bronze Birch Borer, Image, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ commons/3/3d/Agri I us_a nxi us_1326203.j pg Cooley Spruce Gall Adelgid. 2015. Natural Resources Canada. Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-313). Donovan, G and Butry D, 2010, Trees in the City: Valuing street trees in Portland, Oregon Landscape and Urban Planning. Energy Information Administration, 2003, Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2003. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/ Evergreen Cities Task Force, 2009, A Guide to Community and Urban Forestry Planning, Washington State Department of Commerce. https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/rp_urban_guide_to_urban_ forestry_programming.pdf Faber Taylor, A. & Kuo, F.E., 2006, "Is contact with nature important for healthy child development?" State of the evidence. In Spencer, C. & Blades, M. (Eds.), Children and Their Environments: Learning, Using and Designing Spaces. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. b: Appendices Packet Pg. 336 3.2.a Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade (FACT) Act of 1990 — P.L. 101-624. Forest Insect and Disease Leaflets, 2017 - Laminated Root Rot. USDA Forest Service https://apps.fs.usda.gov/views/laminatedrootrot Heisler, G.M., 1986, "Energy savings with trees." Journal of Arboriculture, 12, 113-25. Hartel, D, 2003, "GASB 34: Urban Natural Resources as Capital Assets", 2003 National Urban Forest Conference, Southern Center for Urban Forestry Research & Information. Hollingsworth, C.S., editor. 2019. Pacific Northwest Insect Management Handbook [online]. Corvallis, OR: a Oregon State University. http://pnwhandbooks.org/insect (accessed 31 March 2019). E i-Tree. , 2012, Tools for Assessing and Managing Community Forest. www.itreetools.org 0 Jo, H.-K. and E.G. McPherson. 1995. Carbon storage and flux in urban residential greenspace. Journal of ca M Environmental Management. 45:109-133 Kaplan, Rachel and Stephen. 1989. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge: U) c Cambridge University Press. _ Karl, Tom., P. Harley, L. Emmons, B. Thornton, A. Guenther, C. Basu, A Turnipseed, K. Jardine. 2010, Efficient Atmospheric Cleansing of Oxidized Organic Trace Gases by Vegetation. Web 11/9/2010. http://www. w sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/330/6005/816 0 Kenny, Andy, P. van Wassenaer, A.L.Satel, 2011, Criteria and Indicators for Strategic Urban Forest Planning and v Management, Arboriculture and Urban Forestry 37(3):108-117. M Kuo, F.E., & Sullivan, W.C., 2001. Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime? i c Environment & Behavior, 33(3), 343-367. rn� Kuo, F.E., 2003. The role of arboriculture in a healthy social ecology: Invited review article for a Special Section. N Journal of Arboriculture 29(3), 148-155. a. Land and Water Conservation Fund, 2012, nps.gov. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. http://www.nps.gov/lwcf/ Miller, R. W. 1988. Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. U) c The Nature Conservancy. 2012, www.nature.org 0 E The National Arbor Day Foundation, 2012, Tree City USA Award, http://www.arborday.org/ w Natural Resources Canada. 2015. Cooley Spruce Gall Adelgid. Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. c E 2005. Forest Health Protection —Emerald Ash Border. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. a http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/eab/index.html Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. 2005. Forest Health Protection —Dutch Elm Disease. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. http://na.fs.fed.us/fhp/ded Oregon State University (OSU), 2017. College of Forestry, Swiss Needle Cast. http://sncc.forestry.oregonstate.edu/glossary/term/17 PNW Plant Disease Handbook PNW Insect Handbook Appendices 66 Packet Pg. 337 3.2.a Pscheidt, J.W., and Ocamb, C.M., senior editors. 2019. Pacific Northwest Plant Disease Management Handbook [online]. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. http://pnwhandbooks.org/plantdisease (accessed 31 March 2019). Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, 2012, http://www.pscleanair.org/ Puget Sound Partnership, 2012, www.psparchives.com Science Now. Tree Leaves Fight Pollution. October 2010. sciencemag.org. Web 11/05/2010. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/10/tree-leaves-fight-pollution.html Simpson, James, 2002. "Improved estimates of tree -shade effects on residential use," Energy and Buildings 34, 1067-1076. Simpson, J.R. and E.G. McPherson. 2000. Energy and air quality improvements through urban tree planting. In: Kollin, C., (ed.). Building cities of green: proceedings of the 1999 national urban forest conference; Seattle. Washington, D.C.: American Forests: 110-112. "Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1." Trees Near Power Lines I Residential I Snohomish County PUD, 15 Dec. 2017, www.snopud.com/home/treetrim.ashx?p=1219. The Trust for Public Lands. 2012, www.tpl.org U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Division, 2017. Urban Ecosystems and Processes (UEP). https://www.fs.fed. us/psw/topics/urba n—forestry/ U.S. Department of Energy, 2004. "Green Roofs," Federal Technology Alert DOE/EE-0298, Federal Energy Management Program. Washington Department of Ecology, 2011— Slope Stabilization and Erosion Control, http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/pubs/93-30/index.html Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009. Land Use Planning For Salmon, Steelhead and Trout. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00033/psst—externa I reviewd raftJu ne152009.pdf Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2016. Periodic Status Review for the Bald Eagle. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01825/draft_wdfw01825.pdf Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2018. https://www.dnr.wa.gov/ Washington State, 1990. Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.070 (1) Land Use Elementl). Washington State University Extension, 2008, WSU Extension Publishing and Printing, http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/ebl380e/ebl380e.pdf Wickman, Boyd, et al., 1988. Forest Insect & Disease Leaflet Douglas -Fir Tussock Moth 86. https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/topics/urban — forestry/ Wolf, K.L. 1998, "Urban Nature Benefits: Psycho -Social Dimensions of People and Plants".University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture, Human Dimensions of the Urban Forest, Fact Sheet #1. Wolf, K.L. 2007. The Environmental Psychology of Trees. International Council of Shopping Centers Research Review. 14, 3:39-43. Xiao, Q.; McPherson, E.G.; Simpson, J.R.; Ustin, S.L. 2007. Hydrologic processes at the urban residential scale. Hydrological Processes 21:2174-2188. Xiao, Q., E.G. McPherson, S.L. Usfin and M.E. Grismer. 2000. A new approach to modeling tree rainfall interception. Journal of Geophysical Research 105(D23) :29,173-29,188 67 Appendices Packet Pg. 338 3.2.a Appendix B9. Table of Figures P-jures Figure 1: Land Cover Classes 5,23 Figure 2: Fragmentation Comparison 24 Figure 3: Forest Fragmentation 25 Figure 4: Tree Canopy by Park 27 Figure 5: Most Valuable Environmental Benefit 53 Figure 6: Most Valuable Intangible Benefit 54 Figure 7: Maintenance Expectations 55 Tabler Table 1: Benchmark Values 3 Table 2: Tree Canopy of 5 Largest Parks 27 Table 3: Acres of Sensitive Area by Fragmentation 28 Table 4: Percent Sensitive Area by Fragmentation 29 Table 5: Decision matrix for urban forest management in Edmonds 31 Table 6: 2016 Urban Forestry Expenditures 32 Table 7: Current Urban Forest Workload and Staffing Levels 32 Table 8: Summary of Current City of Edmonds Tree Cutting Regulations 40 Appendice, vo Packet Pg. 339 3.2.a Appendix C: Community Survey Responses Introduction: The survey questions provided a public feedback opportunity during the early stages of plan development. They were designed to solicit input from residents and businesses in the City of Edmonds and help guide the plan development by understanding about how respondents. The questions were arranged into 4 groups: • How do you value trees? • Your opinion about public trees. (City managed trees on streets and in parks) • Your opinion about private trees. (privately managed trees) • Who are you? (Simple Demographics) While providing valuable information, the results of this survey should not be interpreted to be a statistically significant survey representing all of Edmonds. 175 individuals responded to the survey (0.4 percent of the Edmonds population) and the geographic distribution of respondents was not a control factor, as a result the survey responses may include an over representation of view properties. However, these responses do represent views of many citizens who are particularly interested in the management of the City's urban forest. Question 2: Trees are known to provide benefits to the environment. Understanding which benefits are most appreciated by residents can help guide long-term management strategies. Please rank (1-5) the following ENVIRONMENTAL benefits in order of their value to you. (i.e., 1 = most valuable and 5 = least valuable): Ilmprovec ' Quality Energy Savings FProtect Water Quality/Reduced Stormwater Runoff Carbon Storage Wildlife Habitat Other 69 Appendices Packet Pg. 340 3.2.a Question 1: Trees are important to the quality of life in Edmonds. Responses Strongly Agree 74.86% 131 Agree 21.71% 38 lisagree 2.297. Strongly Disagree 0.57% 1 Not sur 0.00% 0 Not Sure 0.57% 1 Other (please specify) 0.00% 0 Question 2 (Extended) 36.57% 64 24.00% 4 7 14.29% jA 4.57% 8 5.14% 9 13.71% 24 26.86% 47 21.71% 38 36.57% 64 25.71% 45 10.29M 8 8.57% 15 8.57% 15 17.14% 30 36.00% 63 28.57% 50 45 22.29% 39 12.57% 22 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 49.71% 87 P5.71%14FRO 29.71% 52 10.86% 19 0.00% 0 175 2.88 17 175 3.3 1175]64.49 0 0 Appendices 70 Packet Pg. 341 3.2.a Question 3: Trees also provide less tangible benefits to society. Understanding which of these benefits are most appreciated by residents can help guide long-term management strategies. Please rank (1-8) the following AESTHETIC and/or SOCIOECONOMIC benefits in order of their value to you. (i.e., 1= most valuable and 8 = least valuable): Attractive to Residents 14.86% 26 21.71% 38 16.00% 28 13.14% 23 Beauty/Aesthetics 34.29% 60 21.14% 37 14.86% 26 14.29% 25 Shaded Trails,sidewalks, and bike trails 21.71% 38 17.14% 30 24.00% 42 11.43% 20 Shaded Parking 2.86% 5 3.43% 6 8.57% 15 9.71% 17 rover wand neighborhoo 14% 9 10.29% 18 1W9/. 22 13.71% 24 Increased Property Values 4.00% 7 5.14% 9 5.14% 9 9.71% 17 Passive creatio 4% 9 6.86% 12 12.00% 21 4.00% 7 Shaded streets/Buffer from vehicles 13.14% 23 16.00% 28 12.00% 21 16.00% 28 Question 4: Optional. Use this space to provide additional comments on the benefits of Edmonds' public trees. Answered 60 Skipped 115 Question 5: What is your current awareness of the City's urban forest program? Please check all that apply. I was not aware that t I have visited the City's webpage for information about public trees and/or the urban forest I have read a newspaper article that discussed public trees and/or Edmonds' urban forest I have participated or volunteered with tree related events in the City Other (please specify) 71 Appendices Packet Pg. 342 3.2.a Question 3 (Extended) 15.43% 27 9.71% 17 6.86 % 12 2. 29% 4 7.43% 13 2.86% 5 2.29% 4 2.86% 5 9.71% 17 9.7�7 4.57% 8 1.71% 3 29.71% 52 8.57% 15 17.71% 31 19.43% 34 1.143% 34 18. 9% 32 1F29% 25 6.29% 11 10.29% 18 13.71% 24 22.86% 40 29.14% 51 14.86% 26 20.00% 35 21. 15.43% 27 13.71% 24 13.14% 23 9.71% 17 6.29% 11 Question 5 (Extended) 36.69% 62 23.67% 40 52.07% 88 14.79% 25 0 �5.39 175 6.29 175 3.03 175 4.25 175 3.05 175 4.89 Appendices 72 Packet Pg. 343 3.2.a Question 6: Trees can grow to obstruct streets and sidewalks. How often do you encounter this issue with trees in the public rights -of -way. Daily 13.02% 22 Weekly 11.83% 20 10.65 % 18 Several Times AYear 34.32% 58 Never J 30.18% 51 Answered .• Skipped 61 Question 7: Trees can become damaged or develop structural weakness over time, these issues may be risks for injury to persons or property. How often do you encounter this issue with public trees? &J 9 Weekly 4.14% 7 - 2.96% 5 Several Times A Year 41.42% 70 Never 46.15% 78 Question 8: Trees can appear sick and unhealthy from damage by insects, diseases, or simply poor tree care regimes. How often do you observe this issue with public trees? i 5.33AMb 9 Weekly _ 2.96% 5 /lonthly 5.92% 10 Several Times A Year 43.20% 73 Never 42.60% 72 73 Appendices Packet Pg. 344 3.2.a Question 9: In general, I am satisfied with the current level of maintenance provided for Edmonds' public trees. Strongly agre= 10.65% 18 Agree 59.17% 100 Disagree � 11.83% 20 Strongly Disagree 8.88% 15 Not SIT,_9.47% 16 Answered 169 Skipped 61 Appendice, Packet Pg. 345 3.2.a Question 10: What level of maintenance would you prefer for public trees? Please rank the following options according to your preference (1 = most desirable; 5 = Least desirable) None -Keep them natural Best possible care (all trees should look good) Clearance only (keep th ewalks and streets clear) Take care of hazardous trees. Holistic Plant Health Care (Improve the urban forest, but not necessarily every tree) Question 11: Edmonds needs more public trees. jWngly Agree A7.87% 64 Agree 28.99% 49 Fsagree 17.16% 29 Strongly disagree 5.33% 9 not sure 10.65% 1 Xnmswwered 169 Skipped Question 12: Where would you like to see more public trees planted? Please check as many as apply. 59.17% 100 Open spaces and Natural Areas 60.36% 102 59.17% 100 Golf Courses 11.24% 19 Downtown 42.60% 72 Trails and bike paths 45.56% 77 dmonds has enough public trees 20.12% 34 Other (please specify) 17.75% 30 Answered 11F .• Skipped 75 Appendices Packet Pg. 346 3.2.a Question 10 (Extended) 3.55% 6 8.88% 15 10.06% 17 25.44% 43 45.56% 77 6.51% 11 169 1.92 15.38% 26 9.47% 16 21.89% 37 26.04% 44 23.08% 39 4.14% 7 169 2.67 6.51% 11 24.26% 41 27.81% 47 26.04% 44 10.65% 18 4.73% 8 169 2.89 52.07% 88 26.04% 44 14.20% 24 5.33% 9 1.78% 3 0.59% 1 169 4.22 21.89% 37 30.18% 51 23.08% 39 12.43% 21 8.28% 14 4.14% 1 3.47 Appendices 76 Packet Pg. 347 3.2.a Question 13: What types of education and public outreach would you like to see offered by the urban forestry program? Please check all that apply. eminars and workshops 1 44.38% 75 Interpretive trails and displays 59.76% 101 Website resources MMMISM 62.72% 106 Online videos (e.g. YouTube) 24.26% 41 /tree walks 55� Informational brochures 43.20% 73 Other (please specify) 11.83% 20 Question 14: Optional. Please use this space for any additional comments about the care of public trees. Answered 40 Skipped 135 Question 15: What is/are your biggest concern for trees in Edmonds? (Check as many as apply) Trees blocking my view 24.70% 41 Trees shading my yard 9.04% 15 Tree debris in 12.65% 21 Healthy mature trees being removed during development 68.67% 114 rnopy loss 57.83% 96 Loss of wildlife habitat 72.29% 120 Other Concerns(please specify) %% Appendices Packet Pg. 348 3.2.a Question 16: What are your experiences with trees on nearby properties around you? Please select any from this list any statements you agree with. ■ Trees near my property are a nuisance 11.98% 20 Trees near my property are a dangerous 17.37% 29 Trees near my property block views 29.34% 49 Trees near my property are beautiful 67.66% 113 Trees near nWpropqlF are healthy 59.28% 99 1 want more trees near my property 25.15% 42 have no trees near my property 0.637o I don't agree with any of these statements. 2.40% 4 Question 17: When private properties are developed or improved, trees on the property can be impacted. Should the City be involved with protecting trees on private property during construction? Answer Choices .. Yes. The City should require property owners to preserve trees on private parcels where reasonably possible. 53.89% 90 No. This City of Edmonds should not concern itself with trees on private property. 17.96% 30 Not sure. This issue is more complicated. 28.14% 47 Appendices 78 Packet Pg. 349 3.2.a Question 18: In your opinion, what are the best ways to encourage tree planting and preservation on private property? Please select as many as apply. ir Education and outreach 79.04% 132 Information about how to hire a professional tree care company 29.34% 49 Require tree care companies to have a certified arborist on staff 28.74% 48 Free (or low-cost) Trees 55.09% 92 Ordinances, Rules or Regulations 35.33% 59 Other (please specify) 22.75% 38 Question 19: Optional. Please use this space for any additional comments about trees on private property. ditional Comments Answered ., Skipped 131 Question 20: Which gender do you identify with? A III nswer Choices Male 1 28.66% 47 Female 59.76% 98 Gender Diverse" 1.83% 3 Prefer not to answer 9.76% 16 79 Appendices Packet Pg. 350 Question 21: What age group are you representing? 3.2.a Under 18 0.00% 0 18 to 25 1.22% 2 26 to 35 4.27% 7 36 to 45 11.59% 19 46 to 55 21.34% 35 56+ 61.59% 101 Question 22: Where do you live in Edmonds? Please choose a neighborhood from the list below. Downtown/The Bowl 40.85% 67 Westgate 7.32% 12 rive Corners 8.54% 14 Perrinville 4.88% 8 IMeadowdale M4.27% 7 Seaview 15.24% 25 Lake Ballinger 22% 2 HWY 99 3.05% 5 ther (please specify) 14.63% 24 Appendice, 80 Packet Pg. 351 Question 23: What is your relationship with Edmonds' urban forest. (Choose all that apply) 3.2.a I am a resident of Edmonds M 95.12% 156 1 am a frequent visitor to Edmonds 10.98% 18 q own a business in Edmonds 6.71% 11 I appreciate public trees 72.56% 119 1 have planted public trees as a volunteer 18.90% J1 I help care for a public tree adjacent to my property 10.98% 18 have donated money to a non-profit foundation in support of public trees 15.85% 31 None of the above 0.61% 1 16ther (please specify) 7 81 Appendices Packet Pg. 352 3.2.a Question 24: Please provide any additional comments or feedback (Optional) Answered 33 Skipped 142 Appendice, 82 Packet Pg. 353 3.2.a Appendix D: Open House Summary Report On June 22nd, 2017, the City of Edmonds hosted the first of two open houses in the Brackett Room at City Hall to share information about the City of Edmonds Urban Forestry Management Plan and gather input from citizens. The open house included a presentation by Ian Scott of Davey Resource Group and a brief Q and A from the audience to ask clarifying questions. The presentation provided attendees an overview of Edmonds' urban forest, an introduction to what will be included in the Urban Forest Management Plan, and that the Davey Resource Group team has completed to date. Following the presentation, attendees were invited to provide input- thoughts, ideas, concerns, questions- on six discussion/opinion boards where a broad topic was introduced on each board followed by initial suggestions generated through the prior stakeholder interview process. Attendees were invited to express their opinions using dots (where green= a positive "vote"/ agreement for the suggestion, yellow= concern/ hesitation of the suggestion, and red= a negative "vote"/disagreement or dislike of the suggestion). Attendees were invited to use as many dots of each color necessary to express their opinion of each suggestion on each board. In addition, each board provided an area for Additional Suggestions where attendees were invited to write down their thoughts, ideas, concerns, questions on a sticky note and adhere it to the board for other attendees to review and "vote" on, as well. Lastly, a confidential and anonymous option was provided for attendees to provide comments and feedback by writing their thoughts, ideas, concerns and questions on index cards that were placed inside a box and not shared at the public meeting. The Davey Resource Group team also provided a link for attendees to give additional feedback through an online survey. That survey can be accessed via the home page on the City of Edmonds website, under the "What's New..." section: • https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ EdmondsUFMP Local media provided public announcements of the open house leading up to the event: • http://myedmondsnews.com/2017/06/ rem inder-open-house-managing-citys-tree- cover-set-june-22/ • https://edmondsbeacon.villagesoup.com/p/ open-house-planned-to-discuss-managing-city- s-tree-cover/1660111?source=WeeklyHeadlines My Edmonds News covered the open house and provided a news story and video of the presentation to the public: • http://myedmondsnews.com/2017/06/public- asked-share-ideas-managing-edmonds-urban- forest/ • http://myedmondsnews.com/2017/06/now- video-open-house-plan-manage-edmonds- urban-forests/ 83 Appendices Packet Pg. 354 3.2.a Opinion Board #1: What tree benefits do you most appreciate? A. Improved Air Quality - B. Energy Savings elllbMReduced StormwateglMnoff ■ D. Carbon Storage ET Wildlife Habitat ■ F. Beauty/Aesthetics G. Shaded trails, sidewalks, and bike H. Improved retail areas and neighborhoods I. Increased prope J. Shaded streets and parking lots K. Additional Ideas Wind protection (think roof shingles); noise reduction; shade- calm/healing; sound of wind through branches; hi -class (untreed neighborhoods proven to have higher crime- "the projects" don't get trees, Bellevue does); soil retention; cools streams; coastal trees involved in weather cycle to prevent inland desertification City revenue increase with more views Air quality requires big, tall trees 4 A& 7 14 12 4 3 _7 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Appendice, Packet Pg. 355 3.2.a Opinion Board #2: What types of outreach and education are I - nrAfArrArl /vali iorl7 A. Electronic (websites, links, youtube, apps) 2 0 0 i. Species selection 4 0 0 ii 1 0 0 iii. Tree pruning 4 1 0 Interactive tree selector 1 1 0 V. Irrigation 1 0 0 olunteer opportunities 1 0 0 B. Hard copy (pamphlets, newsletter) 3 0 0 Species selectio� 3 1 0 ii. Tree planting 1 0 0 iii. Tree pruning 3 1 0 iv. Irrigation 0 0 0 C. Hands-on (Workshops, seminars) 2 0 0 i. Tree planting 2 0 0 Tree pruning 5 0 0 iii. Irrigation 0 0 0 Volunteer opportunities 1 0 0 D. Additional Ideas 7 1 0 Neighborhoo Ings for education and outreach 0 0 Maybe a pamphlet with a map of specific trees of interest 0 0 0 Pamphlets telling what species of trees on city property amount of carbon storage, % stormwater absorption- info which appeared tied to Main St trees for a very short time. Maybe 0 0 0 story in the Beacon [local newspaper with print and online circulation] New name needed 0 0 0 85 Appendices Packet Pg. 356 Opinion Board #3: What is/are your biggest concern(s) for t in Edmonds? Trees blocking my view B. Trees shading my yard 3 0 7 ft Tree debris in 1 5 D. Healthy mature trees being removed 12 0 3 [E. Canopy loss 3 F. Loss of wildlife habitat 15 0 3 Additional Co Private development- current Edmonds land use code allows developers to completely clear treed lots for development 1 0 0 (residential, commercial, etc). This is not okay. It disrupts urban IS omeone who would be willing to negotiate or help mediate V between neighbors having difficulty with trees vs. view, perhaps 1 0 0 Lto come to the home if asked and accepted by both parties Need to address invasives in our forests that prevent the 0 0 0 establishment of seedlings. Without that there will be no forests Critical areas ordinances are not followed- All native vegetation 0 0 is removed for development This becomes a question of aesthetics- learn to see trees, which are beautiful and characteristic of the luxuriant NW where we 2 0 0 have chosen to reside- as the "view". Trees are very connected to the idea of "the commons" in which we have not much I believe these green dots indicate agreement with the stated additional concern. 'Note: for this opinion board: Green dots = concerned Red dots = not concerned Appendice- ov Packet Pg. 357 3.2.a Opinion Board #4: What level of maintenance would you prefer for aublic trees? A. None (keep them natural) 1 4 2 B. Best possible care (all trees should look good) 7 1 3 Mlearan� (keep sidewalks and streets clear) 7 1 1 D. Take care of hazardous trees 10 2 0 lolistic plant health care (improve the urban forest, but not necessarily every tree) 8 3 0 F. Additional Ideas In past, City has been resistant to allow removal of dangerous and dying trees even when 3 arborists said remove. Need 0 0 0 process to effectively deal with dangerous trees. Utilize/ plant and replace trees that "heave" the sidewalks. ie- 2 0 0 avoid trees that interfere with built environment. Native trees preferred. Alder are not trash tree 0 Edmonds is a City of Views- Very important that property owner's views are protected. As a first step/tonight's meeting 0 1 0 working together to protect environment as well as property owners will put this plan in a more optimistic mode. There were not actually green dots placed on this Additional Idea sticky note, but two other people wrote "Agree" directly on the note itself. 87 Appendices Packet Pg. 358 3.2.a Opinion Board #5: Where would you like to see more trees planted? A. Parks B. Open Spaces Commercial properties D. Streets and medians E. Parking lots M F. Private properties G. Along railroad- need tall ones to defray pollutants. Along all arterials for same reason. Along streams to keep them cool 10 0 0 10 0 1 9 2 0 7 3 2 0 8 1 1 1 0 0 Appendices 88 Packet Pg. 359 3.2.a Opinion Board #6: What are the best ways to encourage tree I M planting and preservation on private property? A. Free (or low-cost) trees 10 0 0 B. Information about how to hire a professional tree care 3 0 0 company Education and Outreach 16i 0 0 D. Tree planting events 5 0 0 Additional Ideas Update land use code so developers cannot clear all of the trees when building. Current code allows to clear the entire lot. 3 0 1 Education- slow but steady so that folk begin to know that all the oxygen we breathe is produced by (largely) trees- for "views" 0 0 0 we can cut out our lungs. Provide ideas for good trees that are more like 15 ft tall in order 3 0 0 to keep both trees and preserve view. City needs a full-time arborist. Codes should: 3 0 0 Neighbor education and outreach (about critical areas and streamside property management more important than public 0 0 0 meetings for general public) �a FL c E aD a� L 0 U_ D 0 T Cl) tD 0 I r O N IL u_ Q c 0 E w c aD E t r Q 89 Appendices Packet Pg. 360 1 1. W}rot tree benefit do YOU i111p5t appreciate? I r r...rri#r r twmr�a..iay{E.3pd7ra+n.r.eNrRrrReN #ii�i##•i*#• • i"2GF"• Lam' ]r h.41y r+w.r.r#rr. r#• r, INew r/awrl Wri[r -� ii ••#�iii.ir uya rrra.i+Lvote.ardiavTrm i#*9..e �. N. 0#aroma M'y.wNY�a-ice #i# k *r� `� orA�Lw,Y ibr 3.2.a M M: ' r t 2. What types of vutreoth and 3. What is cre your Biggest ' L; �rr�` education are preferred valued? : concern(s) for trees in Edrnorlds? A_ E40ronic (Websile, links, Youfube, Apps)111 A. kaos blocking my aiaw 1N 4. 5wier fak.r:an 00 a iM. I.rrr&&F.+Tn.rsear is ti. iroas shodirkp my yard 0 • *. Nri�,riq.� � • • +�. WImsF..r oppnrr..,.eirr� �. 4�lard Cot}y {PPrTrphiotS, P#ewirelt4•es j�� xrex r-anrw,p :.o # • C• M4ss¢F-On JWori&966pst Sam non#}IDO i Tr_?lnre:•p R T�hvr~Q Uses iw 4.ynrilon W. Yelrna.rrOFpa•hn4ier� ¢. jk;{driipnal ldwni �`~r C- Trm dnhris in my yard # 0 • •• i D- Hapllby srsaTunv F.awsL.ing ramvYadi •o• • • ••• tr, Canopy lore * 4ft 000 00 I. Loss ofwirdld,aliabgal •1M0aSo•0 0 *• else 0 W:'d Ad. impi4l Concerns sue'.... r # r 6. Whot are the best ways to f encourage tree planting and f 5. Where would you like to e more preservation on Private Property? v What level of rnalri.. 01te would trees planted? seq. Frap far low-ea3F� rroes you prefer far pul�liI frees? A. Fora. 1 A, Noe Weep the- rwsyral) i #* i i i iir •!• �• open $peers •�• •rr {. Cvmmerciel Properries • ii #reel D. Streets and Medians ip i ai r ii r E. Parking LOT& • F'- Privaxv Prapsftias i iii* i r G. RddiTionalldaos i $. B.e.rpOaible Sars {orrTTaes ilsasrld lank goad] *i ii *one* C. Clibumn&e only jkawp sidewalks & stroe+s rlrs •#ii ir. # D- Tckv care of ho:ordoo. r i ill •ri.i i E. Hdisric Planl firaF+ir Cwe jlmprova rh. w, hen iora5F, bul ncl 4e4oFSPrily axery rree) 0i6 • i l # F. Addr;OnallJcc �-•t? B, Inforrnation obour how re hire a professional tree care I tympany as C. Edutatiao and OuTraach :r# • Il! 0, Troo Planning [venis •0#o• [• A OdiNanat ideas 1� C FL C d N CM M C� L N L O U_ C M L L �r T �r M co I CD �I 0 N a D N C O W C N M 0 M a+ a Appendices 90 Packet Pg. 361 3.2.a Additional anonymous comments: Change name "Urban Forest"- bad impression, oxymoron. Suggestion- Best plant/tree for Best location • Wondering what is/can be done to encourage people to maintain views for neighbors around them? • Let's separate view areas from non -view areas. Right tree for right location. I am concerned about safety regarding older trees in both private and public spaces. We have 70+ year old trees in our neighborhood that lose branches with most wind storms. Who watches out for the health of those trees and probability of danger? Most people would have no idea where to begin, let alone be able to afford to do something like hire an arborist. (signed J Thompson) Questions from the public asked during the presentation: Question regarding how the 30% canopy cover was determined- comment that that number seemed really high. Wondering if there is a uniform process used by all cities. Made comment that grants were judged by how much canopy a City had. Asked for clarification on what the process that was used to determine 30% canopy cover. • Question asking for clarification of the intention of the UFMP- to handle City trees (as stated in an early slide) or is it actually expanded to handle private trees too. Commenter asked for clarification on defining "what is a tree"- a 30ft lilac ... is that a tree? A big rhododendron- is that a tree? • Commenter referring to tree planting suggestions (provided an sign in table on yellow paper)- had a question about why is there not any evergreen on that suggestion guide? Commenter asked question regarding tree topping being preferable to cutting a tree to the ground. Expressed concern over making a "blanket rule" that tree topping is bad or not preferable. • Question regarding information on what kinds of trees do what kinds of things- eg. a fir versus an oak- and where is that kind of data available at? Question referring to the chart shown in the presentation comparing Edmonds with other cities- does that chart take into consideration view property- does it differentiate where there are view properties and where there are not? Commenter suggested that a significant portion of the City [of Edmonds] has views. 91 Appendices Packet Pg. 362 3.2.a Attendance City of Edmonds: • Dave Teitzel, Edmonds City Council • Shane Hope, Development Services Director • Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director • Phil Williams, Public Works and Utilities Director • Kernen Lien, Senior Planner • Rich Lindsay, Park Maintenance Manager • Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager • Brad Shipley, Planner • Debora Ladd, Parks Maintenance Staff Project Team Members: • Ian Scott, Davey Resources Group • Ian Lefcourte, Davey Resources Group • Keeley O'Connell, Nature InSight Consulting Members of the public: • Approximately SO Appendice, 92 Packet Pg. 363