The URL can be used to link to this page

2006.11.06 CC Agenda PacketAGENDA Edmonds City Council Meeting Council Chambers 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds November 06, 2006 Special Monday Meeting 6:30 p.m. - Executive Session Regarding Potential Litigation 7:00 p.m. - Call to Order and Flag Salute 1.Approval of Agenda 2.Consent Agenda Items A.Roll Call B.Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2006. C.Approval of claim checks #91751 through #91884 for October 26, 2006 in the amount of $864,978.99 and #91885 through #92057 for November 2, 2006 in the amount of $415,815.41. Approval of payroll direct deposits and checks #44007 through #44061 in the amount of $770,212.78 for the period of October 16 through October 31, 2006. D.Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Barbara Hintzen (amount undetermined). E.Proposed ordinance amending Residential Parking Permits. F.Approval of Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza and proposed ordinance amending City Code Section 4.04.030, Leases of Public Right-of-Way. 3.(10 Min) City Attorney Annual Report 4.(10 Min) 2006 Annual Report - Municipal Court Judge 5.(15 Min) Approval of Findings of Fact regarding the Closed Record Review held on 10/17/06 - Appeal by Elisabeth Larman on the Architectural Design Board approval of the refurbishment of Old Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South. AgendaQuick©2005 - 2006 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved 6.(30 Min) Public Hearing regarding the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. 7.(30 Min) Public Hearing on the 2007-08 Budget and Revenue Sources. 8.(15 Min) Public hearing on the extension of Ordinance No. 3595 – a zoning moratorium on the acceptance of Architectural Design Board applications or building permit applications, not otherwise vested pursuant to state law prior to date of enactment of this ordinance which seek to utilize modulated design in order to obtain a building height in excess of the twenty-five foot height limitation established by ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2). (Ordinance No. 3595 expires 11/26/06.) 9.(15 Min) Public hearing on the extension of Ordinance No. 3596 – a zoning moratorium on the application of ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) relating to the imposition of special height limits to protect views. (Ordinance No. 3596 expires 11/26/06.) 10.(30 Min) Public hearing on recommendations by the Planning Board for amendments to Chapter 16.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code concerning the General Commercial (CG and CG2) Zones. 11.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person) 12.(15 Min) Discussion on proposed ordinance regarding condominium conversions. 13.(5 Min)Mayor's Comments 14.(15 Min)Council Comments 15.Adjourn AgendaQuick©2005 - 2006 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved AM-672 2.B. Approval of Minutes Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By: Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2006. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Please refer to the attached copy of the draft minutes. Recommendation Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Draft Minutes Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 02:25 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/01/2006 02:26 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 02:28 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/01/2006 02:23 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2006 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 24, 2006 Following a Special Meeting at 6:15 p.m. for an Executive Session regarding potential litigation and a meeting with Planning Board candidates at 6:45 p.m., the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Deanna Dawson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Gebert, City Engineer Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Dawson advised Agenda Item 6 would be pulled from the agenda. She explained that due to issues that were raised during a quasi judicial matter that might impact the Downtown Business zones and because the Council has not yet entered findings with regard to that quasi judicial matter, it was advisable not to discuss Item 6 until the quasi judicial matter was concluded to avoid tainting the proceedings. COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM NO. 6. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Plunkett requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember Olson requested Item H be removed. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, 2006. (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #91579 THROUGH #91748 FOR OCTOBER 19, 2006, IN THE AMOUNT OF $281,784.16. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #43961 THROUGH #44006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $745,401.66 FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2006. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 2 (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM KERILEE BENNETT ($531.24), AND MARK VOTH ($145.94). (E) COMMUNITY SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT – OCTOBER 2006. (G) CONFIRMATION OF PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATES JOHN REED AND MICHAEL BOWMAN. (I) RESOLUTION NO. 1132 IN SUPPORT OF A FOUR-YEAR UNIVERSITY IN THE SNOHOMISH/ISLAND/SKAGIT COUNTY SERVICE AREA. ITEM F: AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION FROM ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS FOR DESIGN OF THE PUGET DRIVE/9TH AVENUE NORTH/CASPERS STREET WALKWAY PROJECT Councilmember Plunkett commented it appeared the funds for this project were not from the REET funds in excess of $750,000 that were available for sidewalk projects. City Engineer Dave Gebert answered this project was budgeted as a $380,000 project in the proposed 2007-2008 budget, $190,000 is anticipated to be grant funds and $190,000 from Fund 125, the portion of REET taxes in excess of $750,000. Councilmember Plunkett asked if the excess had been moved to the capital budget. Mr. Gebert answered yes, explaining Fund 125 was a capital program budget; REET was only available for use on capital projects. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether this project was on the TIP and where it ranked on the TIP. Mr. Gebert advised it was on the TIP and was ranked fairly high although he was not certain of the exact ranking. He explained the portion of the walkway near Edmonds Elementary School had been the subject of considerable citizen concern. Councilmember Plunkett asked if the excess funds were allocated based on TIP priorities. Mr. Gebert answered yes, based on the Council’s approval of the CIP and the TIP. Assuming this project was not the highest priority on the TIP, Councilmember Plunkett asked why this project would be funded instead of the highest priority. Mr. Gebert answered it was high enough that staff recommended it in their budget submission to the Council for funding in 2007-2008 which indicated it was higher than other projects. He explained he would need to compare it to what projects have been accomplished to determine exactly where it ranked on the TIP. Councilmember Plunkett questioned why this project was being done when there were other TIP projects that were ranked higher. Mr. Gebert answered he was uncertain whether there were other walkway projects ranked higher than this project; he offered to research the priority of this project in relation to other walkway projects. Councilmember Plunkett summarized “high enough” did not address the question of what was the highest priority on the TIP. Councilmember Wambolt voiced similar concerns, questioning why this item was on tonight’s agenda when the Council had not yet reviewed the 2007 CIP. He noted this project was in the 2007 CIP but was not in the 2006 CIP. He urged caution with the use of REET funds for walkway projects, preferring those projects occur late in the year or early the following year to ensure there were adequate excess REET funds, unless the funds were left over from the previous year. Mr. Gebert answered staff had a high level of confidence that the City would received approximately $700,000 in 2006 that would be available for project expenditures in 2007. He explained the reason this was presented to the Council tonight was so that staff would be prepared to award a contract for design in January 2007; he did not anticipate any expenditures on this project in 2006. He pointed out this was for design only, not construction. He advised a grant application had been submitted for this project. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 3 Councilmember Wambolt commented it was possible when the Council reviewed the CIP this project would not be ranked as a high priority. Mr. Gebert agreed it was possible the Council could remove a project from the capital budget. Councilmember Marin asked staff to comment on the grant application. Mr. Gebert advised a fairly extensive scope of the project was included with the grant application; the $400,000 grant included not only the walkway on the north and west side of the street but also ADA curb ramp improvements and safety improvements at uncontrolled crosswalks. If the City did not receive the grant, he recommended proceeding with only a small portion of the project – the walkway between Olympic View Drive and Olympic Avenue on which the City has received numerous complaints/concerns from parents that the area was unsafe for students walking to Edmonds Elementary School. Councilmember Marin asked about staff’s level of confidence that the City would receive the grant. Mr. Gebert advised Traffic Engineer Don Sims had been in contact with the granting agency for this project and the 164th walkway and felt the City had a reasonable chance of obtaining the grant. Councilmember Marin asked whether the Council’s approval of this item and staff’s subsequent advertisement for Statements of Qualifications was a promise of work to the highest bidder. Mr. Gebert answered the consultant should have a reasonable expectation that they would be awarded the design contract. He recommended proceeding with design, explaining if the City did not receive this grant, having the design complete would improve the City’s chances for future grants. Councilmember Marin asked the risk of proceeding tonight versus delaying a decision. Mr. Gebert answered if the Council did not approve this project in the capital budget, staff would not award the consultant contract. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the City risked not receiving the grant if the Council did not approve this. Mr. Gebert answered no, explaining his intent was to be proactive so that work could be begin on the design in January and if the grant was received, begin construction next summer. Councilmember Plunkett asked what compelling reason there was for the Council to approve this other than his desire to be proactive on this project versus another priority on the TIP. Mr. Gebert answered no; his goal was to be proactive on this high priority project on which a grant application had been submitted. Councilmember Moore clarified staff’s request did not entail an expenditure at this time. Mr. Gebert agreed, although by advertising for Statements of Qualifications, the consultant community should have a reasonable expectation that the City would award a contract. He reiterated if the City did not receive the grant, his recommendation would be to construct a portion of the walkway which would be part of the design. If staff learned early in the year the City did not receive the grant, the scope of the design could be reduced. Councilmember Moore suggested in the future items such as this not be on the Consent Agenda to ensure the Council had adequate information. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM F. Councilmember Plunkett advised he would vote against the motion, not because it was not a worthwhile project but because he was not aware of what other projects may be higher priorities. He preferred to consider the projects on the TIP in a holistic manner. Councilmember Wambolt advised he would not support the motion, finding it premature until the Council adopted the budget. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS WAMBOLT AND PLUNKETT OPPOSED. The item approved is as follows: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 4 (F) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION FROM ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS FOR DESIGN OF THE PUGET DRIVE/9TH AVENUE NORTH/CASPERS STREET WALKWAY PROJECT. ITEM H: PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF FRIENDS OF THE EDMONDS LIBRARY WEEK, OCTOBER 24 – 28, 2006. Councilmember Olson read a Proclamation declaring, October 24 – 28 as Friends of the Edmonds Library Week. She presented the Proclamation to Laurie Dressler, President, Friends of the Edmonds Library, and thanked the Friends for their efforts. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM H. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as follows: (H) PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF FRIENDS OF THE EDMONDS LIBRARY WEEK, OCTOBER 22 - 24, 2006. Ms. Dressler commented the Friends of the Edmonds Library were an asset to the library as well as the community, having donated approximately $500,000 to the Edmonds Library. She was honored to have served as President of the Friends over the last two years, commenting it was the hardest working, most dedicated, most participatory group she had ever worked with. She commented on the Friends’ recent efforts including purchasing new signs for the Edmonds Library, working with the Garden Club to ensure the inside plants were well cared for into the future, and plans to be involved in the outside landscaping project. She noted three Councilmembers were members of the Friends and she encouraged the Council and public to join the Friends. Ms. Dressler advised of the Friends of the Edmonds Library book sale on Saturday, October 27. She invited Councilmembers to identify a significant, well-loved, or important book they had read. Mayor Haakenson – “It Was All Just Rock-n-Roll II,” by Pat O’Day Council President Dawson – “The World is Flat” Councilmember Orvis – “Puppies for Dummies” and “1776” by David McCullough Councilmember Moore – poetry and non fiction regarding public policy Councilmember Wambolt – “Only the Paranoid Survive” by Andy Grove Councilmember Olson – “1776” by David McCullough and Maisie Dobbs mystery series by Jacqueline Winspear Councilmember Plunkett – Winston Churchill Volume 2 by William Manchester Councilmember Marin – “1776;” a biography of John Paul Jones by Evan Thomas, “From Lucy to Language” by Johanson and Edgar; and next book “Headstrong” by Linda Carl 3. PUBLIC DEFENDER ANNUAL REPORT Public Defender Jim Feldman advised it had been another successful year; billings had increased because of increased caseload and filings. He referred to his letter that provided further information. He advised they had four attorneys in their office, two were in Edmonds every Wednesday. 4. PROSECUTOR ANNUAL REPORT Prosecutor Jim Zachor described the backgrounds of two attorneys they added to their firm, Alberto Guadagno and Jomel McNair. He explained approximately 75% of the courts in the State of Washington did away with the breathalyzer test in DUI cases last year which made it more difficult to prosecute DUI cases. Two weeks ago the Supreme Court declared the statute constitutional, reinstating the use of the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 5 breathalyzer test. He anticipated an increase in the number of DUI filings. He summarized overall the number of filings had increased substantially over the past year. Councilmember Orvis commented the City’s nuisance dog barking code was currently a misdemeanor and consideration was being given to ways to make it easier to enforce. He asked if they had any experience with that law in other jurisdictions. Melanie Dane Thomas answered they did not see many dog barking cases, the majority of animal control cases were dangerous dogs. Councilmember Orvis asked if she could provide further information for the Public Safety Committee meeting. 5. PRESENTATION BY TRANSPORTATION CHOICES COALITION REGARDING THE TRANSPORTATION 101 PROGRAM. Rachel Smith, Field Director, Transportation Choices, explained Transportation Choices was a 501c3 non-profit organization based in Seattle that worked Statewide. Their mission was to bring Washingtonians more and better transportation choices – opportunities to take a bus, train, walk, bike, ferry, carpool, vanpool and drive alone. Their vision is dense urban centers connected by fast, frequent and reliable transportation choices both regionally and locally. Ms. Smith explained described the three program areas they focus on: More Transit –buses, transit, trains, vanpools, etc. In working with Sound Transit in 2006 they were instrumental in getting light rail as the preferred alternative across the I-90 bridge. During the 2006 legislative session, they won legislation that required the Regional Transportation Investment District (RTID) to fund transit as mitigation during construction projects to maintain regional mobility while corridors are under construction. They worked toward creating the office of Transit Mobility in the 2005 Transportation Partnership package and secured approximately $30 million in that package for more transit. Active Transportation – investments in bike lanes and sidewalks. They support Complete Streets legislation that would allow everyone to use all streets. Seattle recently approved a resolution for Complete Streets and Kirkland recently adopted an ordinance. One of their staff members chairs an active Transportation Working Group that works on safe routes to school, school siting, etc. Demand Management – moving the greatest number of people and goods through the existing infrastructure. This includes managing highway lanes via tolling, managing parking via price, commute trip reduction (CRT), etc. Ms. Smith explained their strategies included advocacy, grass roots organizing and education. She reviewed the three reasons transportation was so important – impact on public health, the environment and on quality of life. She emphasized the importance of transportation on public health, pointing out approximately 60% of air pollution comes from vehicle emissions. Over 46% of Washingtonians do not get enough exercise versus residents of more walkable neighborhoods who were less likely to be overweight, more likely to be physically active and more likely to use transit. Riding the bus was 170 times safer than driving. With regard to the impact on the environment, Ms. Thomas said automobiles were the single largest cause of global warming pollution and strides could not be made toward reducing global warming pollution until changes were made in how transportation funds were invested. With regard to quality of life, she pointed out the average American spent 55 work days behind the wheel of their car and the average northwest resident spent approximately $10,000 per year on their vehicle, second only to housing costs. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 6 Ms. Smith highlighted changes that were occurring in Community Transit, Sound Transit, RTID, PSRC, Regional Transportation Commission, WSDOT, and Washington State Legislature/Governor’s office. At the State level, the Sound Transit and RTID’s regional ballot measures will be finalized, there is a new House Transportation Committee Chair and the State Multimodal Concurrency Study and the Washington Transportation Commission’s tolling and rail studies will be issued. She explained Transportation Choices’ priorities were in flux until the outcome of the Sound Transit and RTID elections. They plan to work on increasing the CTR budget requests and better funding reduction grants focused on congested corridors and allocating more funds for CTR efficiencies to local governments and employers. She noted Community Transit was collecting all 9/10th of the one cent they were allowed to collect from sales tax to fund transit. King County Metro will seek the use of their last 1/10th. As the two largest transit agencies will be maxed out on their funding resources, Transportation Choices plans to ask the legislature for more innovative ways to fund transit, reauthorization of the Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation, statewide ID card for disabled riders and handicapped parking enforcement. Ms. Smith explained the Regional Transportation Commission was created during 2006 to consider regional transportation issues including funding and governance and make recommendations during the 2007 legislative session. PSCR was also in the process of updating Destination 2030 and Vision 2020. Ms. Smith explained that due to changes in taxing authority, increased funding for transit and in an effort to provide what the voters want, RTID will likely change their project list; Sound Transit has not yet completed their project list. Transportation Choices asked RTID and Sound Transit to consider five principles when they select projects – 1) fully fund Sound Transit, 2) fix it first, 3) transit to compliment construction, 4) significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions via carbon assessments, and 5) congestion pricing. She summarized transportation continued to be one of the most challenging subjects. There had been progress in the last few years and they want to continue that momentum. She encouraged the City to use Transportation Choices as a resource. Councilmember Moore inquired about the relationship between transportation and economic development. Ms. Thomas agreed transportation, economic development and land use were linked. However, as a focused organization, economic development was not a subject they did a lot of research or policy work on. Councilmember Moore asked what Transportation Choices envisioned as innovative ways to fund transit. Ms. Thomas answered they were working with Community Transit and King County Metro but did not yet know what innovative ways to fund transit would be suggested. An example would be congestive pricing hot lanes or high occupancy toll lanes. She noted tolling could be collected to fund a particular project or reinvested in transportation solutions such as transit. As a member of the Community Transit and Sound Transit Boards, a frequent transit user, a member of the Health District and a person concerned with the environment, Councilmember Marin thanked Ms. Thomas for the support offered by Transportation Choices and for illuminating these important subjects. Councilmember Plunkett asked about the membership of Transportation Choices. Ms. Thomas answered they were a coalition of whoever wanted to join. Members included Seattle, Bellevue, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Care Research, Starbucks, Whatcom Transit, Skagit Transit, environmental groups and advocacy groups such as Cascade Bike Club, Bike Alliance of Washington, etc. Funding was from grants as well as individual donations and organizational members. Council President Dawson asked for contact information for groups who wanted to have the Transportation 101 presentation. Ms. Smith explained the Transportation 101 was usually a one hour Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 7 presentation where they provided materials followed by open discussion. She provided their website, www.transportationchoices.org and her email Rachel@transportationchoices.org. Council President Dawson identified former State Representative Mike Cooper in the audience who had been very active in Transportation Choices. Ms. Smith advised he was their Board President. 6. CONTINUED COUNCIL DELIBERATION AND ACTION ON THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2006 ON THE DRAFT "BD - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONES" INTENDED TO BE APPLIED TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. This item was pulled from the agenda via action taken under Agenda Item 1. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, explained to date she had described the series of problems with Edmonds Crossing including a floating breakwater and a third slip with overhead loading as a fix for exposure. In this chapter, entitled “Eenie, Minnie Minie Moe,” she recalled at one time an oversight committee mandated the Edmonds Crossing project be designed to encourage walk-on passengers by reducing the walking distance. This proved an impossible task as the walking distance was determined by two unchangeable factors – an access road that cleared the railroad tracks by 23½ feet and a WSF directive that the grade not exceed 3%. Because no practical option could be found to reduce the walking distance, several options were considered and abandoned including moving walkways, monorail technology, transit buses, trams and an unmanned people mover. The current solution was a double ended shuttle bus in Phase 1 with airport-like carts as an ultimate solution. She noted the number of vehicles that would be required was unknown and the high cost of labor had not been considered. Her next chapter, “ An Edmonds Kind of Idea, Just Blast It Away,” would address the landslide hazard on the Unocal hillside. Don Kreiman, Edmonds, expressed his appreciation for the transportation presentation, commenting transportation affected everything including land use decisions. He referred to Norma Bruns’ comments a few weeks ago regarding condominium conversions, noting the Council was considering ways to require property owners to provide compensation to tenants. He noted what happened to Ms. Bruns was a symptom of what was happening in the City – there was not enough affordable housing for families or seniors. He recalled some Councilmembers voted against allowing higher building heights in Firdale Village and Five Corners, pointing out those were areas that could be developed with more affordable housing via residential over retail. He urged the City to change its transportation and land use polices so that more affordable housing could be built for seniors and families. He commented on the dwindling student population in Edmonds as people moved north to find more affordable housing that was fundamentally changing the character of the City. Mike Cooper, Edmonds, explained Transportation Choices Coalition was more than just a corporate group, they had several hundred citizen members as well as a growing list of cities who were choosing to become members. He urged the City to consider a membership during their budget process. He explained Transportation Choices was a statewide organization that provided resources to assist communities in working together to resolve transportation issues on a regional level. He referred to the group Alt Trans that was formed by a former Snohomish County Councilmember who later founded Transportation Choices Coalition and was their former Executive Director. He congratulated the City on its proclamation regarding global warming, explaining reducing the number of cars and concentrating on moving people would have a significant effect on global warming. Don Heighway, Edmonds, recalled last year’s budget included a number of road projects. He suggested a master plan process to provide an overall vision for road projects rather than a patchwork approach. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 8 Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Consent Agenda Item F discussed earlier, explaining sidewalks were installed on one side of the road in that area and center turn lanes constructed when Hwy. 524 was widened. A sidewalk was later constructed along Olympic Avenue and a walkway on Olympic View Drive. He concluded Edmonds Elementary has had a safe walkway for a long time. He recalled following the Council’s approval to use REET funds in excess of $750,000 for road and walkway projects, staff presented a proposal for an intersection improvement on SR104 that the Council rejected. He suggested Item F was a similar project and was not a priority. He recommended staff research arterial and collector streets that did not have sidewalks on either side, particularly near schools. He objected to scheduling design of the Puget Drive/9th Avenue North/Caspers Street Walkway Project on the Consent Agenda, viewing that as an attempt to slip it through. He recommended the Council delay any decision until the priority list was examined and the budget was adopted. 8. 2007-08 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS Council President Dawson explained this item was intended as an opportunity for Council to raise questions; not all staff members were present as it had been anticipated this item would be at the end of a lengthy meeting. She intended to schedule a follow-up meeting to conduct a thorough budget workshop and described challenges with selecting a date. She suggested Tuesday, November 14 following committee meetings or Saturday, November 18. Either date would provide an opportunity for a budget workshop and discussion prior to the public hearing on November 21. The Council agreed to hold a budget workshop on Tuesday, November 14 following committee meetings. Administrative Services Director Dan Clements referred to two issues that were raised earlier and addressed in the packet – ending fund balances and the impact of fee increases on a sample of residences in the City. He advised information would be provided with regard to an inquiry about the EMS levy. Councilmember Wambolt inquired about funding for a compensation consultant. Councilmember Orvis asked for additional information regarding the large format copier, questioning why it was an ongoing expense. He asked if it would be possible to use a software solution, explaining he dealt with large, very detailed plans at work and they were provided in PDF. Council President Dawson noted the biennial budget appeared to be very status quo over the next two years and asked whether there were expenditures that were being delayed. She requested information from each department regarding their future needs and how emergent/urgent those needs were. She asked how the EMS levy affected other departments’ budgets, recalling Mayor Haakenson’s comment during his budget presentation that the EMS levy was an important piece of the City’s future. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out the per $1,000 assessment that citizens paid was decreasing; in 2003 and 2004 it was over $2.50 per $1,000, in 2005 it decreased to $2.32, in 2006 it was down to $2.13, and projected in 2007 to be $1.82. He asked why the assessment was decreasing. Mr. Clements answered although assessed valuations increased, the City had a 1% cap on property tax increases. As property valuations increased, the assessment per $1,000 would continue to decrease. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the funding for removing and replacing trees on Main Street between 5th and 6th was in the budget. Public Works Director Noel Miller advised funding was included in the maintenance budget for the Parks and Street maintenance crews to remove the trees on the south side of Main next year, replant the trees and install grates and sidewalks. The same would be done on the north side of Main in 2008. Council President Dawson requested any additional questions be provided in writing and staff’s answers be provided in the November 6 packet so that Council could review staff’s response and indicate at the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 9 November 6 meeting what departments needed to make a presentation or be available for questions on November 14. Council President Dawson pointed out the first meeting in November would be on Monday, November 6 due to the election on Tuesday, November 7. She advised the budget workshop on November 14 would begin at 7:00 p.m. following Council committee meetings at 6:00 p.m. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson advised of the columbarium dedication at the Edmonds Cemetery on Saturday, October 27 at 11:00 a.m. He reported on the soft opening of the Edmonds Center for the Arts on October 23 with a performance by the Cascade Symphony, an awesome performance in an incredible building. He commended the Public Facilities District for what they were able to deliver. He also recognized Stephen Clifton and Cindi Cruz who assisted with bringing the project in on time and under budget. He encouraged everyone to stop by and see the facility. 9A. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS. Community Services/Development Services Committee Councilmember Moore reported the Committee discussed conversion of rental apartments to condominiums. A number of Esperance residents who were present to discuss the conversion of an apartment building were referred to Snohomish County Councilmember Gary Nelson as Esperance is not in Edmonds. The Committee considered State law governing condominium conversions and although there is not a great deal the City can do, the Committee plans to recommend requiring tenants be provided a small compensation for moving expenses. 10. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS. Council President Dawson reported on SnoCom, explaining one of the issues with having two communications centers, SnoCom and SnoPak, particularly for border agencies such as Fire District 1 and Mill Creek, was transferring calls between the two communication centers. Fire District 1 was dispatched by SnoCom; however, the Sheriff’s office that serves as the police agency in that area is dispatched by SnoPak. She explained there had been discussions in the past regarding the best way to approach that issue until technology upgrades in 2010 that would address connectivity. She explained SnoCom had been promoting interconnectivity between the systems and although there was thought to have been agreement between the two agencies, whenever funding for interconnectivity arose, something prevented it from occurring. A recent meeting with the representatives from the agencies revealed that although the Chair and Vice Chair of SnoPak believed there was support for interconnectivity, the members of the SnoPak Board did not support that concept. It was agreed to form a group with members of SnoCom and SnoPak to develop a solution. She relayed SnoCom had to withdraw a grant application due to this indecision. Councilmember Moore reported the Snohomish County Economic Development Council discussed the 4- year university for Snohomish, Island and Skagit Counties. She noted the City Council passed a resolution tonight in support of a 4-year university which she would present to the Higher Education Coordination (HEC) Board later this week. The HEC Board will develop a recommendation to the legislature during the 2007 legislative session. She reported she was asked by Snohomish County Cities and Towns to work on an Economic Development Committee. The Snohomish County Economic Development Council also discussed Paine Field. There was interest expressed regarding a more aggressive study of Paine Field expansion but there was no consensus reached with regard to that item. She noted Edmonds was not a member of the Snohomish County Economic Development Council, she had attended the meeting at Council President Dawson’s request. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 10 Councilmember Moore recalled on the Consent Agenda the Council confirmed the Mayor’s appointment of two members to the Planning Board. She noted both were active in the community, had strong professional backgrounds, were gentlemanly, deliberative, and eager to learn and were willing to serve in this voluntary capacity. She noted all cities’ boards and commissions were volunteers but made it possible for government to work effectively. As a member of the Board of Trustees at Edmonds Community College, she and other appointees receive a great deal of training regarding how to be an effective boardmember, their responsibilities, etc. She commented although the Council appointed very well meaning and qualified boardmembers, they did not receive any training. She relayed that Mayor Haakenson planned to provide training to the City’s boards and commissions. Mayor Haakenson introduced the two new Planning Board Members, John Reed and Michael Bowman. Councilmember Wambolt reported on the October 9 Port meeting where the Commission evicted another boat owner for late payment and non-use of his boat. He pointed out the Port wanted boat owners to use their boats and not use the Port only for storage. The Commission also discussed the public plaza and park on the west side of Anthony’s and are close to making a decision. The Commission meeting also included a workshop on their draft budget. Councilmember Wambolt reported on the AWC Conference where the speaker was the AWC Executive Director Stan Finkelstein. Mr. Finkelstein mentioned that many former city officials were running for positions in the legislature this year and many were favored to be elected. He saw that as a good thing for cities because they would be aware of the problems facing cities. Councilmember Wambolt explained the State conducted a financial audit of the City annually; Mr. Finkelstein advised the State auditor would begin to conduct performance audits on the City’s overtime policies, open public records, use of City automobiles by employees, etc. He commented Seattle had 18 full-time employees to provide public records to citizens. Councilmember Wambolt commented for many Brightwater was a nasty word and the reason many got involved in holding public office. He advised Brightwater was providing for 15% of the project hours to construct that facility in the Woodinville area, a $1.6 billion project, to be performed by workers at various apprenticeship levels. One of the goals of Brightwater’s apprenticeship program was to help veterans find construction career opportunities through the Helmets and Hardhats Program. These opportunities would provide veterans a career path as well as a support network through local union memberships. Councilmember Olson reported on the PFD meeting where they discussed the grand opening on January 6. She envisioned it would be a great event and hoped a lot of people would attend. Next, she commented on the Halloween event in downtown where the streets were closed off and merchants distributed candy. She thanked the merchants for this event, noting they purchased the candy themselves. Councilmember Plunkett advised in January the Historic Preservation Commission planned to present six properties to the Council for consideration for including them on the Edmonds Historic Registry. Councilmember Marin reported there was a sold out crowd at the Cascade Symphony’s performance in the new Edmonds Center for the Arts auditorium. As a former president of the Cascade Youth Symphony, he was very familiar with the auditorium but emphasized the renovated auditorium was nothing like the old one. He urged the public to experience a performance at the new Center. Councilmember Marin reported the area’s first light rail car would come through Everett and on to Seattle in about two weeks. He announced that two weeks ago Sound Transit authorized the purchase of property Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2006 Page 11 in Mukilteo. This purchase would allow the tracks in Mukilteo to be installed which would facilitate the double tracking and interim station in Edmonds. Councilmember Marin reported Community Transit’s Planning, Marketing and Operations Committee would be considering proposed service changes effective in February 2007. He noted these changes would restore service cuts made as a result of I-695. He advised Community Transit was taking over the Commute Trip Reduction Program from Snohomish County next year and hoped to make it an even more effective option for employers. Councilmember Marin reported the Snohomish County Health District’s Central Planning Committee has been working with executive leadership to develop a strategic plan for the Health District. They approved the strategic plan a few weeks ago that will help the Health District to, 1) fulfill their public health role during disasters and emergencies, 2) become more effective and efficient in service delivery of health services in the District and County, and 3) act as agents of social and behavior changes that improve public health. Mayor Haakenson wished City Clerk Sandy Chase a Happy Birthday yesterday. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m. AM-678 2.C. Claim Checks, Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Debbie Karber, Administrative Services Submitted For:Dan Clements Time:Consent Department:Administrative Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action:Approved for Consent Agenda Agenda Memo Subject Approval of claim checks #91751 through #91884 for October 26, 2006 in the amount of $864,978.99 and #91885 through #92057 for November 2, 2006 in the amount of $415,815.41. Approval of payroll direct deposits and checks #44007 through #44061 in the amount of $770,212.78 for the period of October 16 through October 31, 2006. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Recommendation Approval of claim checks and payroll direct deposits and checks. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year: 2006 Revenue: Expenditure: $2,051,007.18 Fiscal Impact: Claims $ 864,978.99 Claim $ 415,815.41 Payroll $ 770,212.78 Attachments Link: Claim Cks 10-26-06 Link: Claim Cks 11-02-06 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 Admin Services Dan Clements 11/02/2006 03:17 PM APRV 2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:23 PM APRV 3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 03:26 PM APRV 4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:39 PM APRV Form Started By: Debbie Karber Started On: 11/02/2006 11:45 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91751 10/26/2006 068201 ACTIVE NETWORK LTD003392 9/06 Class on-site implementation & 9/06 Class on-site implementation & 001.000.310.514.230.410.00 7,640.63 9/06 Class on-site implementation & 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 4,278.75 9/06 Class on-site implementation & 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 11,919.38 9/06 Class on-site implementation & 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6,723.74 Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.410.00 680.02 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 380.81 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 1,060.82 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 598.41 Total :33,282.56 91752 10/26/2006 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND NOVEMBER 2006 KENNELING SERVICES-NOVEMBER - EDMONDS NOVEMBER KENNELING SERVICES 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 1,895.07 Total :1,895.07 91753 10/26/2006 000710 ALASKAN COPPER & BRASS 359660-1 SEWER DEPT - BRASS PIPE FOR GRINDER SEWER DEPT - BRASS PIPE FOR GRINDER 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 370.20 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 32.58 Total :402.78 91754 10/26/2006 060205 ALLIED BUILDING PRODUCTS CORP 7301551-00 FAC MAINT - SUPER ANCHOR RETROFIT 1Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91754 10/26/2006 (Continued)060205 ALLIED BUILDING PRODUCTS CORP FAC MAINT - SUPER ANCHOR RETROFIT 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 304.00 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 27.06 Total :331.06 91755 10/26/2006 001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 090547 JOHN DEWHIRST PLANNING BOARD MEMBERSHIP JOHN DEWHIRST PLANNING BOARD MEMBERSHIP 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 56.25 Total :56.25 91756 10/26/2006 063402 APA PLANNERS BOOK SERVICE 108137 PLANNING & URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS - PLANNING & URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS - 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 193.00 Total :193.00 91757 10/26/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3738718 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.410.00 38.66 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.410.00 3.44 Total :42.10 91758 10/26/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3724636 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 35.09 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.12 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC512-3729276 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 35.09 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.12 2Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91758 10/26/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK PW - MATS512-3732493 PW - MATS 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.38 PW - MATS 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 5.26 WATER DEPT UNIFORM SVC 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 11.75 Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.12 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 1.03 3Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91758 10/26/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC512-3732494 STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 5.49 STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 5.49 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.49 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.49 4Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91758 10/26/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK PW - MATS512-3737198 PW - MATS 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 5.24 PW - MATS 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 5.24 Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.12 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.47 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 1.03 PW - MATS 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.38 PW - MATS 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 5.26 PW - MATS 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 5.24 WATER DEPT - UNIFORM SVC 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 11.75 5Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91758 10/26/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC512-3737199 STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24 STORM/STREET UNIFORM SVC 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC512-3738719 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 39.19 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.49 Total :223.82 91759 10/26/2006 071377 ARGUELLES, ERIN ARGUELLES1019 REIMBURSEMENT WRITE ON THE SOUND REIMBURSEMENT 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 56.05 Total :56.05 91760 10/26/2006 064343 AT&T 425-771-0152 STATION #16 FAX STATION #16 FAX 001.000.510.522.200.420.00 25.63 Total :25.63 91761 10/26/2006 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST November-2006 NOVEMBER 2006 AWC PREMIUMS 11/06 Fire Pension AWC Premiums 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 4,396.65 11/06 Retirees AWC Premiums 001.000.390.517.220.230.00 25,382.10 11/06 Gaydos AWC Premiums 001.000.510.526.100.230.00 959.03 11/06 AWC Premiums 811.000.000.231.510.000.00 252,520.61 6Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :283,258.399176110/26/2006 001702 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST 91762 10/26/2006 070512 BANNER BANK Retainage 15 E1BA.Marshbank Retainage 15 E1BA.Marshbank Retainage 15 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 16,163.28 Total :16,163.28 91763 10/26/2006 060502 BERG, COLIN BERG7353 TAIJIQUAN TAIJIQUAN #7353 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 378.00 Total :378.00 91764 10/26/2006 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 061015COE WEB SITE MAINTENANCE Web Site Maintenance 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 300.00 Total :300.00 91765 10/26/2006 068032 BLANCH, ANN BLANCH7347 TAIJIQUAN TAIJIQUAN # 7347 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 67.50 Total :67.50 91766 10/26/2006 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 540957 INV#540957 EDMONDS PD - BETH NAMETAGS FOR BETH 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 18.00 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 1.58 Total :19.58 91767 10/26/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY99125 ALS SUPPLIES medical oxygen 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.86 Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 1.59 7Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91767 10/26/2006 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY ALS SUPPLIESLY99127 medical oxygen 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 26.79 Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 2.38 Total :48.62 91768 10/26/2006 067314 CERTIFIED FOLDER DISPLAY SVC 338974 Distribution svc. for brochures - 5/1 - Distribution svc. for brochures - 5/1 - 001.000.240.513.110.410.00 2,256.80 Total :2,256.80 91769 10/26/2006 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT7226 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #7226 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 165.20 Total :165.20 91770 10/26/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 425-418-5733 CELL PHONE CHARGES SEPT. 2006. CELL PHONE CHARGES SEPT. 2006. 001.000.620.558.600.420.00 16.71 Total :16.71 91771 10/26/2006 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460471723 VOLUNTEER UNIFORMS volunteers 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 44.72 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 3.98 UNIFORMS460471724 Stn. 16 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 102.19 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.09 8Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91771 10/26/2006 (Continued)066382 CINTAS CORPORATION UNIFORMS460472779 Stn. 17-ALS 001.000.510.526.100.240.00 96.47 Stn. 17-Ops 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 96.47 Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.240.00 8.59 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 8.58 OPS UNIFORMS460472805 Stn. 20 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 110.24 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.81 Total :490.14 91772 10/26/2006 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 4883 ALS SUPPLIES & PRO SERVICES ALS supplies 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 9,568.18 ALS admin 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 382.73 Total :9,950.91 91773 10/26/2006 065519 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 3RD PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT OF NARCOTIC DRUG FUND/EDM 3RD PAYMENT/DRUG FUND~ 104.000.410.521.210.490.00 5,000.00 Total :5,000.00 91774 10/26/2006 067186 CLEAR IMAGE INC 59971 INV#59971 EDMONDS PD PRINTS CASE 06-1214 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 4.07 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 0.37 Total :4.44 9Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91775 10/26/2006 070231 CNR INC 49524 Xpress Care Yrly Maint Renewal Xpress Care Yrly Maint Renewal 001.000.390.528.800.480.00 3,335.00 Sales Tax 001.000.390.528.800.480.00 296.82 Total :3,631.82 91776 10/26/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES E1701318-1 SUPPLIES LINERS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 478.88 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 42.14 Total :521.02 91777 10/26/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES E1706597 FAM MAINT SUPPLIES - TT, KIT ROLL FAM MAINT SUPPLIES - TT, KIT ROLL 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1,395.40 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 123.02 FAC MAINT SUPPLIES - LINERS, LOTIONE1706599 FAC MAINT SUPPLIES - LINERS, LOTION 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2,026.06 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 178.51 FAC SUPPLIES - NO TOUCH WHITE ROLLE1706601 FAC SUPPLIES - NO TOUCH WHITE ROLL 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 651.12 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 57.52 10Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :4,439.139177710/26/2006 004095 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES 91778 10/26/2006 064369 CODE PUBLISHING CO 27075 ECDC CODE BOOKS FOR NEW PLANNING BOARD ECDC CODE BOOKS FOR NEW PLANNING BOARD 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 120.00 Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 10.56 Total :130.56 91779 10/26/2006 071308 COLELLA, TERESA COLELLA1030 BASKETBALL SCOREKEEPER BASKETBALL SCOREKEEPER @ EDMONDS CC~ 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 135.00 Total :135.00 91780 10/26/2006 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 0001 CREDIT FOR CANCELLED CLASS CREDIT FOR CANCELLED CLASS:~ 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 -30.00 11Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91780 10/26/2006 (Continued)069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS CREDIT CARD PURCHASES4715630345742425 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 106.19 IPM INSECT & WEEDS WORKSHOP:~ 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 300.00 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 17.98 CARD PRINTING 123.000.640.573.100.490.00 193.24 GYMNASTIC SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 45.75 WSNLA WORKHOPS: JANICE NOE 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 100.00 ARTS COMMISSION SUPPLIES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 3.03 CONFERENCE: DAVE TIMBROOK 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 250.00 LITERATURE BOXES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 38.78 ARTS COMMISSION - PLANNERS 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 17.40 CONFERENCE: STEVE MCGOWAN 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 50.00 PESTICIDE RECERTIFICATIONS:~ 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 160.00 ARTS COMMISSION MAILING TUBES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 34.30 DISCOVERY PROGAM SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 28.58 OUTDOOR LITERATURE BOX 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 51.70 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES (TO BE 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 44.41 COLUMBARIUM SUPPLIES 12Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91780 10/26/2006 (Continued)069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 1.95 ART COMMISSION SUPPLIES:~ 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 19.54 PARK MAINTENANCE - WHEELS FOR BLOWER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 54.45 WRITE ON THE SOUND LUNCHES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 850.36 CREDIT CARD PURCHASES4715630624442994 CEMETERY COLOR COPIES 130.000.640.536.200.490.00 21.78 SISTER CITY VISITORS TO FUTURE OF 623.200.210.557.210.490.00 262.50 CEMETERY LAMINATION 130.000.640.536.200.490.00 49.50 Total :2,671.44 91781 10/26/2006 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 4715 6300 0155 8875 #4715 6300 0155 8875 - STERN LODGING-STERN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 109.89 Total :109.89 91782 10/26/2006 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 4715630143817577 TOOLS & HYDRAULICS INC -FLEET SHOP TOOLS & HYDRAULICS INC -FLEET SHOP 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 109.00 HELM AUTOMOTIVE - UNIT B 17 FIRE BOAT - 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 114.95 BAYSIDE OUTBOARDS - OILS, SUPPLIES 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 128.02 ROLAND TOYOTA - TRANS FLUID FOR TOYOTA 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.59 Total :376.56 91783 10/26/2006 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY7568 CHILDREN'S CLASS FUN WITH THOMAS~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 176.40 13Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :176.409178310/26/2006 065891 065891 CONLEY, LISA 91784 10/26/2006 005965 CUES INC 257336 SEWER DEPT SUPPLIES SEWER DEPT SUPPLIES 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.20 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 19.16 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.17 Total :26.53 91785 10/26/2006 068190 DATEC INC 100106 INV#100106 EDMONDS PD HOURLY LABOR - LAPTOP REPAIR 001.000.410.521.220.480.00 75.00 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.480.00 6.68 Total :81.68 91786 10/26/2006 068734 DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES 10/24/06 M. Richardson - time loss overpayment, M. Richardson - time loss overpayment, 001.000.410.521.210.110.00 403.86 Total :403.86 91787 10/26/2006 065635 DEWHIRST, JOHN DEWHIRST APA CONF. 10/4-6/06 REIMBURSEMENT. APA CONF. 10/4-6/06 REIMBURSEMENT. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 290.00 Total :290.00 91788 10/26/2006 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 06-2679 MINUTE TAKING 10/17 Council Minutes 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 414.40 Total :414.40 91789 10/26/2006 007252 DUNN, DIANNE DUNN7137 OIL PAINTING CLASSES 14Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91789 10/26/2006 (Continued)007252 DUNN, DIANNE OIL PAINTING #7137 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 312.00 OIL PAINTING #7136 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 351.00 Total :663.00 91790 10/26/2006 068357 EARTH TECH 91220-3-394405 Gerdes Rockery Review Gerdes Rockery Review 001.000.620.524.100.410.00 1,610.00 E5FG.Northstream 30-Inch Storm Repair92358-05-394126 E5FG.Northstream 30-Inch Storm Repair 412.200.630.594.320.650.00 10,691.25 Total :12,301.25 91791 10/26/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 72156 SUPPLIES OIL, FASTENERS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 25.33 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.25 Total :27.58 91792 10/26/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 72011 FAC - SOCKETS FAC - SOCKETS 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 17.42 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 1.55 Total :18.97 91793 10/26/2006 007775 EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CHAMBER1024 TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT 123.000.640.573.100.410.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 91794 10/26/2006 008350 EDMONDS PARKS & RECREATION PCASH1024 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 15Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91794 10/26/2006 (Continued)008350 EDMONDS PARKS & RECREATION RHYTHMIC GYMNASTICS SUPPLIES & EQUIPMENT 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 44.00 GYMNASTICS CLEANING SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 9.78 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 18.25 PARK MAINTENANCE MEASURING CUPS TO MIX 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.79 WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 8.97 BULBS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 48.91 WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 29.06 WRITE ON THE SOUND SERVING DISHES 117.100.640.573.100.350.00 56.45 Total :219.21 91795 10/26/2006 008475 EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS DEPT 10/01-10/24/2006 PW - SEMINAR PARKING - N MILLER 16Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91795 10/26/2006 (Continued)008475 EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS DEPT PW - SEMINAR PARKING - N MILLER 001.000.650.519.910.430.00 5.00 FAC MAINT - SEMINAR "CLIMATE IS 001.000.651.519.920.490.00 20.00 WATER/RECYCLE - SEMINAR - "GLOBAL 411.000.654.537.900.490.00 30.00 MILEAGE FOR SEPT 06 - S FISHER 411.000.654.537.900.430.00 30.70 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.96 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.96 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 0.96 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 0.96 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.94 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.63 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.63 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 1.63 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 1.63 PW - DISH SOAP FOR LUNCH ROOM 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.63 STORM - PEST MGMNT RE CERT - D BROWNING 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 90.00 STREET - PEST MGMNT RE CERT - J WHATMORE 111.000.653.542.900.490.00 90.00 WATER/SEWER - CLOROX 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4.77 17Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91795 10/26/2006 (Continued)008475 EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS DEPT WATER/SEWER - CLOROX 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.77 SEWER - CAR WASH SUPPLIES 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 37.00 SEWER DEPT - DRAIN HOSE FOR TV TRUCK 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.80 SEWER - VHS TAPES FOR TV TRUCK 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 9.79 TOYOTA UNIT - GASKET 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.46 FLEET - AMMONIA FOR CLEANING 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.73 FLEET - EXPRESS POSTAGE FOR PACKAGE 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 14.40 Total :361.35 91796 10/26/2006 008550 EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT #15 11303 GYM RENTAL RENTAL & SUPERVISION OF FORMER WOODWAY 001.000.640.575.520.450.00 226.00 Total :226.00 91797 10/26/2006 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 147594 INV#147594 CLIENT#3713 EDMONDS AC EUTHANIZE #6665 GOLDEN RET. 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 26.00 Total :26.00 91799 10/26/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 185.53 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM1-00825 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 675.38 SPRINKLER1-00875 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 26.84 18Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91799 10/26/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER1-02125 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 47.40 SPRINKLER1-03900 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 78.23 SPRINKLER1-05125 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 50.82 GAZEBO IRRIGATION1-05285 GAZEBO IRRIGATION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 19.99 CORNER PARK1-05340 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 64.53 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05650 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 21.70 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP1-05675 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 884.63 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05700 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 184.45 CORNER PARK1-09650 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 55.96 SW CORNER SPRINKLER1-09800 SW CORNER SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 107.36 PLANTER1-10780 PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 66.24 19Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91799 10/26/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH1-16130 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 47.40 CORNER PARKS1-16300 CORNER PARKS 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 62.82 CITY HALL TRIANGLE1-16450 CITY HALL TRIANGLE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 208.90 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX1-16630 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.27 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER1-17475 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 59.39 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD1-19950 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 40.69 CITY MARINA BEACH PARK6-00025 CITY MARINA BEACH PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 135.28 CITY FISHING DOCK & RESTROOM6-00200 CITY FISHING DOCK & RESTROOM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 180.13 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH6-00410 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 113.80 MINI PARK6-00475 MINI PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 314.48 CITY PARK BALLFIELD6-01250 CITY PARK BALLFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 148.16 20Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91799 10/26/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION CITY PARK PARKING LOT6-01275 CITY PARK PARKING LOT 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 323.62 PINE STREET PLAYFIELD6-02125 PINE STREET PLAYFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 125.10 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (SPRINKLER)6-02900 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (SPRINKLER) 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 155.01 CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT SPRINKLER6-03000 CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 110.96 HUMMINGBIRD HILL PARK6-03275 HUMMINGBIRD HILL PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 101.01 CITY MAPLEWOOD PARK6-03575 CITY MAPLEWOOD PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 124.89 SEAVIEW PARK SPRINKLER6-04400 SEAVIEW PARK SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 208.12 WATER BILL6-04425 8100 185th PL SW 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 133.95 SIERRA PARK6-04450 SIERRA PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 120.96 BALLINGER PARK6-07775 BALLINGER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 73.31 YOST PARK SPRINKLER6-08500 YOST PARK SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 358.76 21Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91799 10/26/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION YOST PARK POOL6-08525 YOST PARK POOL 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 168.96 Total :5,815.03 91800 10/26/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 4-34080 LIFT STATION #14 LIFT STATION #14 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 19.99 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-POLICE/CRT6-02735 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-POLICE/CRT 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 484.77 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE LINE6-02736 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE LINE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 6.53 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE6-02737 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 65.58 PUBLIC SAFETY IRRIGATION6-02738 PUBLIC SAFETY IRRIGATION 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 115.61 LIBRARY & SPRINKLER6-02825 LIBRARY & SPRINKLER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 882.61 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (FIRE DETECTOR)6-02875 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (FIRE DETECTOR) 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 11.42 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER6-02925 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 587.20 Fire Station #166-04127 Fire Station #16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 219.41 fire sprinkler-FS #166-04128 fire sprinkler-FS #16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 6.53 22Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91800 10/26/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION PUBLIC WORKS6-05155 PUBLIC WORKS 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 49.62 PUBLIC WORKS 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 248.08 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 203.43 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 203.43 PUBLIC WORKS 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 287.76 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR6-05156 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 0.82 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 4.08 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 3.34 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 3.34 PUBLIC WORKS FIRE DETECTOR 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 4.72 Total :3,408.27 91801 10/26/2006 066220 EDWARDS, CAROLINE EDWARDS7127 SPANISH FOR KIDS BEGINNING SPANISH FOR KIDS~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 231.00 Total :231.00 91802 10/26/2006 069055 EHS INTERNATIONAL INC.24189 ASBESTOS TESTING. 9159 COE EDMONDS CITY ASBESTOS TESTING. 9159 COE EDMONDS CITY 001.000.620.524.100.410.00 1,472.71 Total :1,472.71 91803 10/26/2006 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 020418 Canon 5870 Copier -9/7 - 10/7/06 23Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91803 10/26/2006 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES Canon 5870 Copier -9/7 - 10/7/06 001.000.610.519.700.480.00 18.47 Canon 5870 Copier -9/7 - 10/7/06 001.000.210.513.100.480.00 18.48 Canon 5870 Copier -9/7 - 10/7/06 001.000.220.516.100.480.00 18.47 Sales Tax 001.000.610.519.700.480.00 1.64 Sales Tax 001.000.210.513.100.480.00 1.64 Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.480.00 1.65 Total :60.35 91804 10/26/2006 047407 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 94513310 7 UBI 312 000 093 000 Q3-2006 Unemployment Insurance 001.000.390.517.780.230.00 13,715.07 Total :13,715.07 91805 10/26/2006 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0021895-IN INV#0021895-IN EDMONDS PD 10 YEAR RESERVE TIE TACK 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 84.00 15 YEAR RESERVE TIE TACK 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 84.00 20 YEAR RESERVE TIE TACK 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 56.00 Freight 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 4.50 INV#0022051-IN EDMONDS PD - RESERVE BADG0022051-IN Freight 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 6.86 INV#0022091-IN EDMONDS PD - K-9 BADGES0022091-IN Freight 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 6.34 24Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :241.709180510/26/2006 008975 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 91806 10/26/2006 062290 FEDEX KINKOS OFFICE AND PRINT 517400002545 PRINTING OVERSIZE PRINTING 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 20.25 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.78 Total :22.03 91807 10/26/2006 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0066284 WATER INVENTORY - W-PIPEBR-02-011 WATER INVENTORY - W-PIPEBR-02-011 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 801.12 WATER INVENTORY - W-FITPAC-02-020 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 346.85 5X42 SV SH SHORTY SOIL PIPES (NON 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 125.73 Sales Tax 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 101.02 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 11.06 Total :1,385.78 91808 10/26/2006 009835 FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS INTL 9404 LEASE FOR CROWN VIC UNIT 233 LEASE FOR 2004 CROWN VIC 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 711.75 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 65.49 MONTHLY LEASE; 6 CROWN VICS9405 UNIT 235,236,237,238,239 Monthly Lease 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 3,358.33 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 308.96 Total :4,444.53 91809 10/26/2006 071311 FORMS AND FILING INC 94521A INV#94521A EDMONDS PD 25Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91809 10/26/2006 (Continued)071311 FORMS AND FILING INC CASES OF 500 FILE FOLDERS 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 906.50 Freight 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 103.03 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 89.85 Total :1,099.38 91810 10/26/2006 066272 FORT DODGE ANIMAL HEALTH 815325 INV#815325 ACCT#460377-5 EDMONDS PD SLEEPAWAY 260MG/ML - 100 ML 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 184.00 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 16.38 Total :200.38 91811 10/26/2006 018495 GLACIER NORTHWEST 57061 STREET DEPT - CEMENT STREET DEPT - CEMENT 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 245.25 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 21.58 STORM DEPT - CONCRETE MIX61299 STORM DEPT - CONCRETE MIX 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 103.15 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 9.08 STREET DEPT - CONCRETE61300 STREET DEPT - CONCRETE 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 343.35 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 30.21 Total :752.62 91812 10/26/2006 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA GLEISNER7343 TAIJIQUAN TAIJIQUAN #7343 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 378.00 26Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :378.009181210/26/2006 068617 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA 91813 10/26/2006 012199 GRAINGER 9210368925 SUPPLIES UTILITY ROLL 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 43.65 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.84 SUPPLIES9212077235 MISC. BANDAGES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 35.91 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.16 Total :86.56 91814 10/26/2006 012199 GRAINGER 9207613275 SR CENTER HVAC - 3HP MOTOR, VARIABLE SR CENTER HVAC - 3HP MOTOR, VARIABLE 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 251.53 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 21.63 Total :273.16 91815 10/26/2006 006030 HDR ENGINEERING INC M-192307 EDMONDS STAGE 2 DBPR - INITIAL WATER EDMONDS STAGE 2 DBPR - INITIAL WATER 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 7,253.73 Total :7,253.73 91816 10/26/2006 069525 HONNEN, DAVID J.HONNEN TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT - D.HONNEN MEAL-HONNEN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 48.77 FUEL-HONNEN~ 001.000.410.521.400.320.00 25.21 LODGING-HONNEN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 101.03 Total :175.01 91817 10/26/2006 049300 HUGHES SUPPLY S125252959.001 WATER INVENTORY - W-INSTABR-01-010 27Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91817 10/26/2006 (Continued)049300 HUGHES SUPPLY WATER INVENTORY - W-INSTABR-01-010 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 228.24 Freight 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 5.50 Sales Tax 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 20.80 WATER INVENTORY - W-INSTABR-0.75-030S125252959.002 WATER INVENTORY - W-INSTABR-0.75-030 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 246.50 Freight 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 6.16 Sales Tax 411.000.000.141.140.310.00 22.49 Total :529.69 91818 10/26/2006 071380 ICHIMURA-HAYASHI, ITSUKO HAYASHI7396 JAPANESE CLASSES JAPANESE FOR KIDS #7396 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 302.40 Total :302.40 91819 10/26/2006 065397 JOHNSON, ANDREW AJOHNSON1021 GYM MONITOR GYM MONITOR FOR 3 ON 3 BASKETBALL LEAGUE 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 38.50 GYM MONITOR~ 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 154.00 Total :192.50 91820 10/26/2006 071382 KIDZART KIDZART7376 KIDZART CLASS KIDZART #7376 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 312.00 Total :312.00 91821 10/26/2006 016600 KROESENS INC 70531 OPS UNIFORMS 28Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91821 10/26/2006 (Continued)016600 KROESENS INC DE 7 & 9 hole zippers 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 54.90 Freight 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 2.60 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 5.06 PREV UNIFORMS71161 Nomex pants, etc. 001.000.510.522.300.240.00 356.90 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.300.240.00 31.41 Total :450.87 91822 10/26/2006 069083 LAMPHERE, KAREN LAMPHERE7268 FALL DETOX FALL DETOX #7268 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 84.00 Total :84.00 91823 10/26/2006 070289 LANG, KERRI LANG1021 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR PLAZA ROOM MONITOR:~ 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 120.00 Total :120.00 91824 10/26/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091668 LOGO ENVELOPES #10 REGULAR Logo Envelope, #10 Regular~250-00117 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 286.00 Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 25.45 Total :311.45 91825 10/26/2006 068670 MARSHBANK CONSTRUCTION INC E1BA.Pmt 15 Thru 09/30-Street/OVWSD Portion 29Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91825 10/26/2006 (Continued)068670 MARSHBANK CONSTRUCTION INC Thru 09/30-Street/OVWSD Portion 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 305,771.62 Thru 09/30-Water Portion 412.100.630.594.320.650.00 193.02 Thru 09/30-Storm Portion 412.200.630.594.320.650.00 1,078.55 Thru 09/30-Sewer Portion 412.300.630.594.320.650.00 58.99 Total :307,102.18 91826 10/26/2006 065829 MARTINSON, LINDA MARTINSON7332 BELLY DANCE CLASSES BELLY DANCE #7332 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 196.00 Total :196.00 91827 10/26/2006 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 324 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 001.000.390.517.220.230.00 6,520.93 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement325 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 001.000.390.517.220.230.00 1,345.50 Total :7,866.43 91828 10/26/2006 068992 MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS 38365 E2FC.Willow Creek Outfall Construction E2FC.Willow Creek Outfall Construction 412.200.630.594.320.650.00 6,442.27 Total :6,442.27 91829 10/26/2006 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 110087441 UNIT 24 - KITS, ELBOWS, REPAIR SUPPLIES UNIT 24 - KITS, ELBOWS, REPAIR SUPPLIES 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 123.80 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 27.75 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 13.03 30Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :164.589182910/26/2006 021983 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 91830 10/26/2006 070341 MUSCLE AND ARM FARM 101306B SUPPLIES REPLACEMENT KNEE PADS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.00 Freight 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.00 Everett Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.91 Total :11.91 91831 10/26/2006 071378 MYTANA 130414 SEWER DEPT - BLADE PACK, SPLICE KITS, SEWER DEPT - BLADE PACK, SPLICE KITS, 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 181.93 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 15.00 Total :196.93 91832 10/26/2006 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0184373-IN SEWER DEPT - GAS DETECTOR REPAIR SEWER DEPT - GAS DETECTOR REPAIR 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 60.00 GAS DETECTOR CASE ASSEMBLY REPLACEMENT 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 60.00 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 9.75 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 11.42 Total :141.17 91833 10/26/2006 068274 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTER 42648 MENTORED LEARNING CLASS TRAINING - J MENTORED LEARNING CLASS TRAINING - J 111.000.653.542.900.490.00 295.00 Total :295.00 91834 10/26/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 832127721-024 INV#832127721-024 EDMONDS PD NEXTEL SERVICE 10/18-11/17/06 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 1,507.65 31Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :1,507.659183410/26/2006 067098 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 91835 10/26/2006 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0340920 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~ 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 166.81 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0342961 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~ 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 95.36 HONEY BUCKET CREDIT0344932 CREDIT FOR HONEY BUCKET @ HUMMINGBIRD 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 -83.39 Total :178.78 91836 10/26/2006 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 433 PLANNIN BD MINUTES 10/11/06. PLANNIN BD MINUTES 10/11/06. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 315.00 HISTORIC PRES. MTG. MINUTES 10/12/06.000 00 434 HISTORIC PRES. MTG. MINUTES 10/12/06. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 135.00 Total :450.00 91837 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC WO#10851510 2007 Prelm Budget Books Printing, 2007 Prelm Budget Books Printing, 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 469.81 King County Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 41.35 Total :511.16 91838 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 976229 Calendars, Pencils, White Board Calendars, Pencils, White Board 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 150.60 King County Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 13.25 Total :163.85 91839 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 762562 OFFICE SUPPLIES 32Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91839 10/26/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC Office supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 77.98 King County Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 6.86 OFFICE SUPPLIES943554 Custom daters 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 38.99 King County Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 3.43 Total :127.26 91840 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 888398 PW ADMIN SUPPLIES - SHARPIES, STENO PW ADMIN SUPPLIES - SHARPIES, STENO 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 31.80 WATER DEPT CALENDAR REFILS 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 32.40 King County Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 2.80 King County Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.85 Total :69.85 91841 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 665799 Desk Calendar for Council Officd Desk Calendar for Council Officd 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 19.42 File Conv Kit and paper for Council Off877468 File Conv Kit and paper for Council Off 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 40.18 Lateral File for Council Office 001.000.110.511.100.350.00 272.63 Copy paper Council Office928232 Copy paper Council Office 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 35.39 33Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91841 10/26/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC Hanging File Folders/File Folders CO949552 Hanging File Folders/File Folders CO 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 38.71 Total :406.33 91842 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 982461 ADMIN SUPPLIES office supplies 001.000.510.522.100.310.00 37.40 King County Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.100.310.00 3.21 ADMIN SUPPLIES987550 Admin paper 001.000.510.522.100.310.00 7.44 King County Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.100.310.00 0.66 Total :48.71 91843 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 878962 INV#878962 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD UNDER DESK KEYBOARD DRAWERS 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 207.98 LASER TONER FOR CAROLINE 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 84.21 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 18.30 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.41 INV#879064 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD879064 36X36X72 STORAGE CABINET 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 349.99 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 30.80 34Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91843 10/26/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC INV#881515 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD881515 BLACK INK FOR PIXMA PRINTER 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 31.20 BLACK, CYAN, MAG, YEL INK FOR PIXMA 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 109.44 CLOROX WIPES 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 12.94 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 12.37 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 1.14 ORG INV# 878962 ACCT#520437 250POL EPD895786 UNORDERED KEYBOARD TRAY 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 -103.99 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.350.00 -9.16 INV#975161 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD975161 FX-7 FAX TONER 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 184.16 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 16.21 Total :953.00 91844 10/26/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 687856 MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS. MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 58.29 King County Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 5.13 MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS.876905 MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 1,188.19 King County Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 104.56 35Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91844 10/26/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS.990850 MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES - DEV. SVCS. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 408.51 King County Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 35.94 Total :1,800.62 91845 10/26/2006 025889 OGDEN MURPHY AND WALLACE 653873 SEPT 06 LEGAL FEES Sept 06 Legal Fees 001.000.360.515.100.410.00 18,426.85 SEPT 06 RETAINER FEES653874 Sept 06 Retainer Fees 001.000.360.515.100.410.00 10,556.00 Total :28,982.85 91846 10/26/2006 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00043618 UNIT 24 - 8" QUICK CLAMP UNIT 24 - 8" QUICK CLAMP 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 119.75 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 19.51 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.26 UNIT 26 - SHUTDOWN SOL KIT00043671 UNIT 26 - SHUTDOWN SOL KIT 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 223.43 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.54 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.50 Total :404.99 91847 10/26/2006 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 39319 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 96.00 36Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :96.009184710/26/2006 027060 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 91848 10/26/2006 069944 PECK, ELIZABETH PECK7373 STRETCH & SCULPT CLASSES STRETCH & SCULPT #7373 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 420.00 STRETCH & SCULPT #7387 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 291.20 Total :711.20 91849 10/26/2006 008400 PETTY CASH EPD OCT 2006 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 37Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91849 10/26/2006 (Continued)008400 PETTY CASH EPD COFFEE FOR THE DEPARTMENT~ 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.49 PARKING - CHIEF STERN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 2.00 JURY DUTY-DEBBIE DAWSON~ 001.000.410.521.700.110.00 10.00 FERRY COSTS - E.FALK~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 22.50 PARKING - G.GANNON~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 2.00 PARKING-CHIEF STERN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 2.00 COOKIES-POLICE FOUNDATION~ 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 6.49 AA BATTERIES-DEPARTMENT 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 20.82 MEAL - A.GREENMUN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 11.47 TOLL BRIDGE - A.GREENMUN~ 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 6.00 B/G INVEST. SUPPLIES ~ 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 7.59 USB HUBS FOR~ 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 38.03 ANNUAL DUES - K.PLOEGER~ 001.000.410.521.210.490.00 15.00 ALCOHOL - FINGERPRINT STATION 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 1.40 FLASH DRIVES~ 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 43.41 Total :196.20 91850 10/26/2006 064552 PITNEY BOWES 3833100-OT06 DM1000 MAILING SYSTEM LEASE DM100 Mailing System Lease~250-00119 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 792.00 38Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :792.009185010/26/2006 064552 064552 PITNEY BOWES 91851 10/26/2006 031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC 0610025 Senior Center Elevation Survey Senior Center Elevation Survey 116.000.651.519.920.410.00 552.50 Total :552.50 91852 10/26/2006 068484 RINKER MATERIALS 9411123123 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 69.75 Total :69.75 91853 10/26/2006 033500 SAHLBERG EQUIPMENT INC 50006 WATER/SEWER DEPT - REPAIR SUPPLIES - WATER/SEWER DEPT - REPAIR SUPPLIES - 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 42.40 WATER/SEWER DEPT - REPAIR SUPPLIES - 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 42.40 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 3.01 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 3.00 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 4.04 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 4.04 Total :98.89 91854 10/26/2006 033550 SALMON BAY SAND & GRAVEL 2153649 STREET DEPT - CEMENT STREET DEPT - CEMENT 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 597.00 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 52.54 Total :649.54 91855 10/26/2006 065001 SCHIRMAN, RON 322 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 001.000.390.517.220.230.00 818.40 39Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :818.409185510/26/2006 065001 065001 SCHIRMAN, RON 91856 10/26/2006 036955 SKY NURSERY 254964 WATER DEPT - SOIL FOR 188TH SOUNDVIEW PL WATER DEPT - SOIL FOR 188TH SOUNDVIEW PL 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 94.85 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 8.35 Total :103.20 91857 10/26/2006 071248 SLEEP INN - SEATAC 15480 INV#15480 ACCT#276 EDMONDS PD - SUTTON ROOM FOR ACADEMY 10/8-10/13/06 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 249.95 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 31.00 Total :280.95 91858 10/26/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2060028723 YOST PARK POOL YOST PARK POOL 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 1,382.56 MAPLEWOOD HILL PARK2710014701 MAPLEWOOD HILL PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.26 Total :1,411.82 91859 10/26/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2060014392 SIGNAL LIGHT SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 28.28 STREET LIGHT2060015456 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 28.28 fire station # 162540794324 fire station # 16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,347.14 LIFT STATION #92790012476 LIFT STATION #9 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 125.28 40Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91859 10/26/2006 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 LIFT STATION #32960019335 LIFT STATION #3 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 105.19 SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHT3380016422 SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 28.28 FIVE CORNERS WATER TANK3460019262 FIVE CORNERS WATER TANK 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 187.93 STREET LIGHT4430018418 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 81.34 STREET LIGHT4860014960 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 151.65 TRAFFIC LIGHT5510015661 TRAFFIC LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 28.77 Fire station #167060000275 Fire station #16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 30.07 Total :2,142.21 91860 10/26/2006 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 32390 INV#32390 EDMONDS PD - BETH MAGMATE PLATES - BRAD BETH 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 4.50 LOCKER MAGNET - BETH 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 4.50 Freight 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 2.00 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 0.98 Total :11.98 91861 10/26/2006 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 47122 DUMP CHARGES 41Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 42 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91861 10/26/2006 (Continued)006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY DUMP CHARGES 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 775.14 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 27.86 Total :803.00 91862 10/26/2006 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2006340 INV#2006340 EDMONDS PD 67.67 BOOKINGS FOR SEPT. 2006 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 5,871.73 664.67 HOUSING DAYS - SEPT 2006 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 37,992.54 Total :43,864.27 91863 10/26/2006 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 61226 Glasby thru 10/14-Street/OVWSD Glasby thru 10/14-Street/OVWSD 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,810.89 Glasby thru 10/14-Water 412.100.630.594.320.650.00 37.59 Glasby thru 10/14-Storm 412.200.630.594.320.650.00 210.03 Glasby thru 10/14-Sewer 412.300.630.594.320.650.00 11.49 Total :2,070.00 91864 10/26/2006 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO Nov 2006 NOV 2006 STANDARD INSURANCE 11/06 Standard Insurance 811.000.000.231.550.000.00 18,618.44 Total :18,618.44 91865 10/26/2006 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 761398 FAC MAINT - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES FAC MAINT - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 83.65 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.44 Total :91.09 42Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 43 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91866 10/26/2006 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10449723 SUPPLIES CLAMPS, SCREWS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 544.02 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 48.42 Total :592.44 91867 10/26/2006 070578 TEL WEST COMMUNICATIONS 708582 C/A 23872 10/10-11/10/06 City Phone Service PRI-2 001.000.390.528.800.420.00 740.84 Total :740.84 91868 10/26/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1439200 TRUNKHILL V-06-81 LEGAL NOTICES. TRUNKHILL V-06-81 LEGAL NOTICES. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 22.08 CITY/AMD-06-1 LEGAL NOTICES.1441285 CITY/AMD-06-1 LEGAL NOTICES. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 15.18 WALCKER V06-116 LEGAL NOTICES.1443893 WALCKER V06-116 LEGAL NOTICES. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 20.01 CDC-06-4 LEGAL NOTICES.1445512 CDC-06-4 LEGAL NOTICES. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 24.15 Total :81.42 91869 10/26/2006 070924 UAP DISTRIBUTION INC S006629051.001 SUPPLIES WINTER GREEN 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 550.00 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 48.40 Total :598.40 91870 10/26/2006 071381 US MAIL SUPPLY INC 21475 E1BA.Cluster Box Unit-12 Door plus 1 43Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 44 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91870 10/26/2006 (Continued)071381 US MAIL SUPPLY INC E1BA.Cluster Box Unit-12 Door plus 1 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,145.00 Shipping 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 100.00 Total :1,245.00 91871 10/26/2006 070864 VERIZON DIRECTORIES CORP 440008288278 C/A 430001405909 Monthly Super Pages Listing 001.000.390.528.800.420.00 106.75 Total :106.75 91872 10/26/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST E1BA.thru 9/16 E1BA.Job Shack Phone thru 10/16 E1BA.Job Shack Phone thru 10/16 112.506.630.595.330.650.00 66.54 Total :66.54 91873 10/26/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-771-1124 CITY PARK MAINTENANCE BLDG-EMAIL CITY PARK MAINTENANCE BLDG-EMAIL 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 51.35 BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER425-775-1344 BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER 001.000.640.574.350.420.00 50.66 YOST POOL425-775-2645 YOST POOL 001.000.640.575.510.420.00 151.55 COMPUTER DEDICATED LINE PR FRONT DESK425-776-6663 COMPUTER DEDICATED LINE PR FRONT DESK 001.000.640.574.100.420.00 52.00 Total :305.56 91874 10/26/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425.775.2525 CITY HALL DIRECTORY LISTING City Hall Directory Listing 10/7-11/7/06 001.000.390.528.800.420.00 3.57 Total :3.57 91875 10/26/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-206-7147 LIBRARY SCAN ALARM 44Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 45 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91875 10/26/2006 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST LIBRARY SCAN ALARM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 14.84 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS425-775-1534 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 159.51 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 296.23 RADIO LINE BETWEEN PUBLIC WORKS & UB425-775-7865 RADIO LINE BETWEEN PUBLIC WORKS & UB 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 50.03 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911425-RT0-9133 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911 001.000.650.519.910.420.00 5.48 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 27.38 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 22.45 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 22.45 PUBLIC WORKS CONNECTION TO 911 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 31.74 Total :630.11 91876 10/26/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-774-0944 FS #20-FAX LINE FS #20-FAX LINE 001.000.510.522.200.420.00 47.57 Total :47.57 91877 10/26/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 464229910-1 206-999-9374 sewer lead cell phone 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 67.84 45Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 46 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91877 10/26/2006 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 425-870-0617469985965-1 Cell phone-Jim Waite 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 35.64 Cell phone-Jim Waite 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 35.63 206-947-3220964212899-00001 cell phone water quality 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 74.58 Total :213.69 91878 10/26/2006 067282 VERNON PUBLICATION LLC IN00544 Ad for InfoGuide Nov. 2006 Ad for InfoGuide Nov. 2006 001.000.240.513.110.440.00 1,825.00 Total :1,825.00 91879 10/26/2006 069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER 48043 INV#48043 CLIENT#25492 EDMONDS PD EMERGENCY VISIT FOR ROCKY 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 90.00 METRONIDAZOLE 250MG FOR ROCKY 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 14.58 BIOHAZARD FEE 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 4.23 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 1.30 Total :110.11 91880 10/26/2006 069380 WA CHAPTER FBINAA ANDERSON TRAINING - SGT.D.ANDERSON/EDMONDS TRAINING-SGT.D.ANDERSON~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 15.00 TRAINING - CPL.BARD - EDMONDS PDBARD TRAINING - CPL. BARD~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 15.00 FBINAA TRAINING-SGT.SMITH/EDMONDSSMITH, DEBBIE TRAINING-SGT.SMITH~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 15.00 46Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 47 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :45.009188010/26/2006 069380 069380 WA CHAPTER FBINAA 91881 10/26/2006 065497 WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY MACK TRAFFIC SAFETY CONFERENCE - L.MACK/EDM CONFERENCE-L.MACK~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 125.00 CONFERENCE - G.MILLS - EDMONDSMILLS CONFERENCE - G.MILLS~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 125.00 Total :250.00 91882 10/26/2006 064008 WETLANDS & WOODLANDS 31863001 STORM DEPT - RHODODENDRONS STORM DEPT - RHODODENDRONS 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 83.75 LACELEAF MAPLE 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 150.00 EMERALD GREEN ARBORVITAES 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 120.00 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 31.48 Total :385.23 91883 10/26/2006 065964 WILLIAM C HOLLIDAY MD PS 323 LEOFF 1 Expense - Timothy Whitman LEOFF 1 Expense - Timothy Whitman 001.000.390.517.220.230.00 74.52 Total :74.52 91884 10/26/2006 051280 ZEP MANUFACTURING 63865900 SEWER DEPT - TRUCK WASH SUPPLIES - JIB SEWER DEPT - TRUCK WASH SUPPLIES - JIB 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 43.80 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.15 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.57 Total :56.52 Bank total :864,978.99133 Vouchers for bank code :front 47Page: 10/26/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 48 9:39:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 864,978.99Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report133 48Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91885 11/2/2006 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 233049 1-13992 PEST CONTROL 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 57.50 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 5.12 Total :62.62 91886 11/2/2006 071394 AGM ELECTRONICS INC S2652 TRANSMITTER TRANSMITTER 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 141.00 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 15.77 Total :156.77 91887 11/2/2006 071373 AGRO DISTRIBUTING LLC 1933596 RI GARDENING SUPPLIES CASORON, SNAPSHOT 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 604.50 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 53.20 Total :657.70 91888 11/2/2006 014940 ALL BATTERY SALES & SERVICE 110423186 SHOP INVENTORY - BATTERIES SHOP INVENTORY - BATTERIES 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 240.80 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 21.43 UNIT PS-17 - BATTERY110423404 UNIT PS-17 - BATTERY 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 231.90 SHOP INVENTORY - BATTERIES 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 111.90 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 30.60 1Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91888 11/2/2006 (Continued)014940 ALL BATTERY SALES & SERVICE SHOP INVENTORY - BOUGHT AND EXCHANGED110423681 SHOP INVENTORY - BOUGHT AND EXCHANGEDG 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -59.95 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -5.34 SHOP SUPPLIES797439 SHOP SUPPLIES 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 61.35 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.46 UNIT 647 - SIDE TERMINAL CONVERSION,876254 UNIT 647 - SIDE TERMINAL CONVERSION, 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 285.80 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.44 Total :949.39 91889 11/2/2006 060205 ALLIED BUILDING PRODUCTS CORP 7332589-00 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB - SUPER ANCHOR BOYS & GIRLS CLUB - SUPER ANCHOR 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 121.60 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 10.82 Total :132.42 91890 11/2/2006 065568 ALLWATER INC 101906089 COEWASTE DRINKING WATER 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 14.95 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 0.89 Total :15.84 91891 11/2/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3743204 UNIFORM SERVICES 2Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91891 11/2/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.410.00 36.66 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.410.00 3.26 Total :39.92 91892 11/2/2006 069751 ARAMARK 10076725 Uniforms for Bldg Div. Uniforms for Bldg Div. 001.000.620.524.100.240.00 436.10 Total :436.10 91893 11/2/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3738720 18386001 UNIFORMS 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 86.83 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 7.73 Total :94.56 91894 11/2/2006 071388 ART GLASS TECHNOLOGIES INC 2144 MUSEUM - CLEANING ART GLASS MUSEUM - CLEANING ART GLASS 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 3,320.10 Sales Tax 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 292.17 Total :3,612.27 91895 11/2/2006 001670 ASSOCIATED GLASS I062219 MUSEUM - ROLLS OF GLAZING TAPE MUSEUM - ROLLS OF GLAZING TAPE 116.000.651.519.920.310.00 75.00 Sales Tax 116.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.68 Total :81.68 91896 11/2/2006 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 344893 FLEET INVENTORY - DIESEL 70 GAL 3Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91896 11/2/2006 (Continued)071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM FLEET INVENTORY - DIESEL 70 GAL 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 127.07 WA ST SVC FEE 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 60.00 ST EXCISE DIESEL TAX, WA OIL SPILL 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 24.93 Sales Tax 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 4.80 FS 20 - 250 GAL345907 FS 20 - 250 GAL 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 463.40 WA ST SERVICE FEE 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 60.00 ST EXCISE DIESEL TAX, WA OIL SPILL 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 89.05 Sales Tax 511.000.000.141.120.000.00 5.28 Total :834.53 91897 11/2/2006 065950 ATS ELECTRO-LUBE INTL INC 44365 1870 BATTERY PACK 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,890.74 Total :1,890.74 91898 11/2/2006 064541 AURORA RENTS INC 118462 WATER DEPT - ROTO HAMMER RENTAL WATER DEPT - ROTO HAMMER RENTAL 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 12.00 DAMAGE WAIVER 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 1.20 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 1.16 Total :14.36 91899 11/2/2006 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 9234195 Canon 5870 Copier lease - 12/1 - 4Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91899 11/2/2006 (Continued)070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING Canon 5870 Copier lease - 12/1 - 001.000.220.516.100.450.00 101.32 Canon 5870 Copier lease - 12/1 - 001.000.210.513.100.450.00 101.33 Supply charge - 12/1 - 12/31/06 001.000.610.519.700.450.00 25.01 Supply charge - 12/1 - 12/31/06 001.000.220.516.100.450.00 25.00 Supply charge - 12/1 - 12/31/06 001.000.210.513.100.450.00 24.99 Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.450.00 11.25 Sales Tax 001.000.210.513.100.450.00 11.25 Canon 5870 Copier lease - 12/1 - 001.000.610.519.700.450.00 101.35 Sales Tax 001.000.610.519.700.450.00 11.25 Total :412.75 91900 11/2/2006 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 3973 Executive Asst., #06-27 Executive Asst., #06-27 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 19.38 Preschool Director, #06-30 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 23.46 Preschool Assistan, #06-29 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 21.94 Total :64.78 91901 11/2/2006 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC 326740 SHOP INVENTORY - ROTOR 5Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91901 11/2/2006 (Continued)028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC B KIT 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 131.32 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 31.56 SHOP INVENTORY - ROTOR 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 227.32 UNIT 237 - ROTOR328100 UNIT 237 - ROTOR 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 227.32 B KIT 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 65.66 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.78 Total :708.96 91902 11/2/2006 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 532529 INV#532529 EDMONDS PD - CAMERON BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 649.95 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 57.20 INV#532550 EDMONDS PD - HONNEN532550 BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 649.95 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 57.20 Total :1,414.30 91903 11/2/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY99396 ALS SUPPLIES medical oxygen 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 8.93 Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 0.79 6Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91903 11/2/2006 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY ALS SUPPLIESLY99487 medical oxygen 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 25.85 Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.310.00 2.30 Total :37.87 91904 11/2/2006 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT7227 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #7227 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 133.00 Total :133.00 91905 11/2/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 4X11032006 ALS COMMUNICATIONS IRIS 001.000.510.526.100.420.00 47.48 Total :47.48 91906 11/2/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 206-369-4557 CELL PHONE FLEET cell phone fleet 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 8.54 Total :8.54 91907 11/2/2006 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460477026 UNIFORMS Volunteers 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 44.72 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 3.98 UNIFORMS460477027 Stn. 16 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 102.19 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.09 7Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91907 11/2/2006 (Continued)066382 CINTAS CORPORATION UNIFORMS460478070 Stn. 17 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 192.94 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 17.17 UNIFORMS460478096 Stn. 20 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 110.24 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.81 Total :490.14 91908 11/2/2006 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 4900 INV#4900 CUST#47 EDMONDS PD PRISONER R&B JULY 2006 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 6,493.33 Total :6,493.33 91909 11/2/2006 067186 CLEAR IMAGE INC 59975 INV#59975 EDMONDS PD PRINTS FOR ANDERSON 06-3688 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 20.74 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 1.85 Total :22.59 91910 11/2/2006 071389 COASTAL WEAR PRODUCTS LTD 5151 UNIT 55 - GUTTERBROOM UNIT 55 - GUTTERBROOM 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 630.00 PRO STRIP EAGLE 60" 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 345.00 Total :975.00 91911 11/2/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES E1708693 005302 8Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91911 11/2/2006 (Continued)004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES PAPER TOWELS/TP/GARBAGE LINERS 411.000.656.538.800.310.23 311.28 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.23 2.50 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.23 27.61 Total :341.39 91912 11/2/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES W1693369 FAC - BOTTLE CAPS FOR SOAP DISPENSERS FAC - BOTTLE CAPS FOR SOAP DISPENSERS 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.00 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.36 Total :16.86 91913 11/2/2006 071236 COLUMBIA ANALYTICAL SERVICES 01-036353-1 273384 C-249 PROCESS CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS 414.000.656.594.320.650.00 736.00 27338401-036758-1 C-249 PROCESS CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS 414.000.656.594.320.650.00 736.00 27338401-037128-1 C-249 PROCESS CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS 414.000.656.594.320.650.00 1,110.00 27338401-038548-1 C-249 PROCESS CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS 414.000.656.594.320.650.00 951.00 Total :3,533.00 91914 11/2/2006 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 101006 4715 6306 8856 9757 COURSE BOOKS/MOORS 411.000.656.538.800.490.00 40.00 9Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :40.009191411/2/2006 069983 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 91915 11/2/2006 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY1019 PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT @ MEADOWDALE 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 90.00 Total :90.00 91916 11/2/2006 065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING SEPT. 2006 INV# SEPT. 2006 EDMONDS PD DRY CLEANING - SEPT. 2006 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 840.93 Total :840.93 91917 11/2/2006 005965 CUES INC 257841 SEWER DEPT - NYLON TIP SET SCREWS SEWER DEPT - NYLON TIP SET SCREWS 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.40 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.87 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.25 Total :27.52 91918 11/2/2006 006458 DAWSON, DEBBIE 0074856 INV0074856 - NEUTER REFUND - DAWSON SPAY/NEUTER REFUND - ADOPTION RECEIPT 001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00 Total :50.00 91919 11/2/2006 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING MCINTYRE AFL DANIEL MCINTYRE ALIEN FIREARMS LICENSE FEE TO DOL FOR ALIEN FIREARM LIC. 001.000.000.237.190.000.00 15.00 Total :15.00 91920 11/2/2006 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2007-WA0024058 WA0024058 WASTEWATER PERMIT 411.000.656.538.800.510.00 29,016.90 Total :29,016.90 91921 11/2/2006 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS October 2006 OCTOBER 2006 DRS 10Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91921 11/2/2006 (Continued)029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 10/2006 drs contributions 811.000.000.231.540.000.00 149,704.44 Total :149,704.44 91922 11/2/2006 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 06-2683 MINUTE TAKING 10/24 Council Minutes 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 173.60 Total :173.60 91923 11/2/2006 071393 DRUCK INC 45873 CIT312 TRANSMITTER 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 690.00 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 5.11 Total :695.11 91924 11/2/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 72429 SUPPLIES MUFFLER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 69.08 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.15 Total :75.23 91925 11/2/2006 063066 EDMONDS COMMUNITY COLLEGE ECC1030 ECC GYM SCHEDULING GYM SCHEDULING FOR ADULT BASKETBALL AND 001.000.640.575.520.450.00 2,950.00 Total :2,950.00 91926 11/2/2006 070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL 8100 BROWN & CALDWELL/UPS BROWN & CALDWELL/UPS 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 10.65 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 0.95 11Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91926 11/2/2006 (Continued)070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL BROWN & CALDWELL/UPS8167 BROWN & CALDWELL/UPS 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 22.86 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 2.03 Total :36.49 91927 11/2/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-25150 9TH & CASPER ST (WEST PLANTER) 9TH & CASPER ST (WEST PLANTER) 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 26.84 9TH & CASPER ST (EAST PLANTER)2-25175 9TH & CASPER ST (EAST PLANTER) 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 52.54 SPRINKLER2-28275 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 49.11 MINI PARK2-37180 MINI PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.64 EDMONDS CEMETERY7-05275 EDMONDS CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 350.80 Total :508.93 91928 11/2/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-26950 LIFT STATION #3 LIFT STATION #3 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 40.69 Total :40.69 91929 11/2/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-01127 WWTP WATER WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 65.04 WWTP WATER6-01130 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 11.42 12Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91929 11/2/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION WWTP WATER6-01140 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 466.27 Total :542.73 91930 11/2/2006 069924 EIMCO WATER TECHNOLOGIES 8445056 17156 SKIMMER HINGED STEEL 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 800.00 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 71.20 Total :871.20 91931 11/2/2006 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 020712 ADMIN MAINT Admin copier maint. 001.000.510.522.100.480.00 84.20 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.100.480.00 7.49 Total :91.69 91932 11/2/2006 071390 EMPLOYEE SAFETY & RESOURSES 2003004 TRAINING SUPPLIES ESR Instructnl Packet 001.000.510.522.400.310.00 299.00 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.400.310.00 26.31 Total :325.31 91933 11/2/2006 069586 ESPIRITU, KRISTA ESPIRITU7430 HULA FOR KIDS HULA KIDS #7430 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 352.08 Total :352.08 91934 11/2/2006 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0714924 SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-PIPEPVC-04-010 SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-PIPEPVC-04-010 411.000.000.141.150.310.00 82.26 Sales Tax 411.000.000.141.150.310.00 7.32 13Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91934 11/2/2006 (Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-PIPEPVC-06-0200714924-1 SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-PIPEPVC-06-020 411.000.000.141.150.310.00 89.54 Sales Tax 411.000.000.141.150.310.00 7.97 Total :187.09 91935 11/2/2006 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0068397 WATER/SEWER - DARK CUTTING OIL WATER/SEWER - DARK CUTTING OIL 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 35.03 WATER/SEWER - DARK CUTTING OIL 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 35.02 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.08 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 3.08 Total :76.21 91936 11/2/2006 070271 FIRST STATES INVESTORS 84777 TENANT #101706 4TH AVE PARKING LOT RENT 4th Avenue Parking Lot Rent for Nov 06 001.000.390.519.900.450.00 300.00 Total :300.00 91937 11/2/2006 070820 FLAME CATERING SERVICE, C/O DONNA'S DINER2547 SISTER CITY BUFFET BUFFET DINNER FOR SISTER CITY HEKINAN 623.200.210.557.210.410.00 656.70 Sales Tax 623.200.210.557.210.410.00 57.79 Total :714.49 91938 11/2/2006 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 82016 June 2006 - 132 plan fees June 2006 - 132 plan fees 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 39.50 14Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91938 11/2/2006 (Continued)070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC June 2006 - 125 plan fees82018 June 2006 - 125 plan fees 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.90 July 2006 - Section 132 plan fees83180 July 2006 - Section 132 plan fees 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 38.60 July 2006 - 125 plan fees83182 July 2006 - 125 plan fees 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.00 Total :179.00 91939 11/2/2006 067232 GERRISH BEARING COMPANY 2068144-01 BALL BEARINGS/SEALS BALL BEARINGS/SEALS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 332.33 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7.21 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 29.88 CONVENTIONAL BELT2068245-01 CONVENTIONAL BELT 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.84 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.90 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1.65 Total :389.81 91940 11/2/2006 012199 GRAINGER 9208041641 FAC MAINT - HAND TRUCK FAC MAINT - HAND TRUCK 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 110.00 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 9.46 Total :119.46 91941 11/2/2006 069864 GRAPHIC ENTERPRISES INC AR107360 Contract overage charge K&E/8036 Bldg 15Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91941 11/2/2006 (Continued)069864 GRAPHIC ENTERPRISES INC Contract overage charge K&E/8036 Bldg 001.000.620.524.100.480.00 36.97 Total :36.97 91942 11/2/2006 071391 GRAY & OSBORNE INC 06713.00-1 E6DA.Design thru 10/21/06 E6DA.Design thru 10/21/06 125.000.640.594.750.650.00 1,316.98 Total :1,316.98 91943 11/2/2006 065412 HANAUER, NANCY HANAUER7367 SIGNING WITH BABY SIGNING WITH YOUR BABY #7367 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 264.00 Total :264.00 91944 11/2/2006 070550 HART-MYLIE, CAROLYN HARTMYLIE1023 PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT~ 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 160.00 Total :160.00 91945 11/2/2006 069164 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 41229895 HP 2420DN LASERJET PRINTER PER QUOTE~ HP 2420dn LaserJet Printer per Quote~330-00318 001.000.610.519.700.350.00 931.00 Sales Tax 001.000.610.519.700.350.00 82.86 Total :1,013.86 91946 11/2/2006 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1037004 6035322500959949 4 X 8 PANEL/STUDS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 37.93 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 3.34 60353225009599491578220 BLDG. SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 25.59 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2.25 16Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91946 11/2/2006 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 60353225009599492074028 SILICONE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 129.36 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 11.38 60353225009599496035016 WASP SPRAY 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.64 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 0.76 60353225009599496045758 PAINT SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 233.70 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 20.57 60353225009599497066130 PAINT SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 206.94 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 18.21 60353225009599497255625 CREDIT DAMAGED BLOWER VAC 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 -76.13 60353225009599498114074 BLOWER VAC 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 69.97 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.16 Total :698.67 91947 11/2/2006 070801 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 14866951 STORM DEPT - UTILITY PUMP STORM DEPT - UTILITY PUMP 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 80.00 Freight 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 7.16 17Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :87.169194711/2/2006 070801 070801 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 91948 11/2/2006 049300 HUGHES SUPPLY S125481226.001 WATER DEPT - 5 1/4"X6"MJ X 3' BURY WATER DEPT - 5 1/4"X6"MJ X 3' BURY 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,277.77 6"MJ 11 1/4 BEND 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 62.05 ROMAC 6" MEGA LUG 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 55.60 4.5" NST X 4" STORZ 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 168.67 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 132.95 Total :1,697.04 91949 11/2/2006 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 70857182 INV#70857182 467070 COMBINED ACCOUNT COPIER RENTAL 10/13-11/12/06 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 630.13 ADDITIONAL IMAGES 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 160.39 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 70.83 Total :861.35 91950 11/2/2006 061546 INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS SUPPLY 603483 WATER DEPT - PUMP STATION 4 - PUMP WATER DEPT - PUMP STATION 4 - PUMP 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 76.25 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 5.60 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 7.28 18Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91950 11/2/2006 (Continued)061546 INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS SUPPLY WATER - SPARE 120V SOLENOID603618 WATER - SPARE 120V SOLENOID 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 76.25 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 7.70 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 7.47 Total :180.55 91951 11/2/2006 070974 JANSSEN, PERRY JANSSEN7400 PRE NATAL YOGA PRE NATAL YOGA #7400 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 277.20 Total :277.20 91952 11/2/2006 068737 JOHNSON ROBERTS & ASSOC 105478 INV#105478 EDMONDS PD PHQ REPORT - PRE-OFFER 10/24/06 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 15.00 Freight 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 1.26 Total :16.26 91953 11/2/2006 015270 JONES CHEMICALS INC 322739 54278825 HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION 411.000.656.538.800.310.53 2,931.39 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.53 230.36 Total :3,161.75 91954 11/2/2006 071395 KIRKLAND MUNICIPAL COURT ISSUE #620232 PKG TKT #K620232 - EDMONDS PD/920KIM DETECTIVE VEHICLE/PARKING TICKET~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 20.00 Total :20.00 91955 11/2/2006 060132 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY 1008642640 STORM DEPT - TRASH BAGS, KNEE PADS, 19Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91955 11/2/2006 (Continued)060132 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY STORM DEPT - TRASH BAGS, KNEE PADS, 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 185.30 Freight 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 35.23 Total :220.53 91956 11/2/2006 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 0019951 810 WALNUT ST - ENVIRONMENTAL 810 WALNUT ST - ENVIRONMENTAL 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 1,295.75 Total :1,295.75 91957 11/2/2006 068493 LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIP DISTRIBU 10240602 INV#10240602 EDMONDS PD H&K TRIGGER RETURN SPRING 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 4.80 H&K USP HI-CAP MAGAZINE SPRINGS 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 56.80 Freight 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 6.95 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 6.04 Total :74.59 91958 11/2/2006 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 10006-314 BACKPACK BLOWER REDMAX BACKPACK BLOWER 001.000.640.576.800.350.00 417.99 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.350.00 37.20 Total :455.19 91959 11/2/2006 071383 LEONARD, BRIAN LEONARD1024 REFUND REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 500.00 Total :500.00 91960 11/2/2006 068278 LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES GANNON POLICE LIABILITY - G.GANNON/EDMONDS PD 20Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91960 11/2/2006 (Continued)068278 LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES G.GANNON/EDUCATIONAL TRAINING~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 299.00 Total :299.00 91961 11/2/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091840 Office Supplies - L. Carl Office Supplies - L. Carl 001.000.210.513.100.310.00 216.00 Sales Tax 001.000.210.513.100.310.00 19.22 Total :235.22 91962 11/2/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091838 Envelopes for Planning Div Envelopes for Planning Div 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 203.64 Total :203.64 91963 11/2/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091803 INV#091803 EDMONDS PD DESK CALENDAR 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 13.96 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 1.24 Total :15.20 91964 11/2/2006 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 52033994 123106800 POLYETHYLENE SHEET 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 92.34 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 75.19 12310680052058880 PRESSURE GAUGE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 27.20 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.54 21Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91964 11/2/2006 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 12310680052062337 PULLEY/BUSHING KEYWAY 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 31.51 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.17 Total :235.95 91965 11/2/2006 071392 MEDIA BAY PRODUCTIONS LLC 4 OUTDOOR CINEMA PACKAGE COMPLETE OUTDOOR CINEMA PACKAGE 001.000.640.574.200.450.00 1,900.00 CINEMA PACKAGE 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 656.00 Total :2,556.00 91966 11/2/2006 069592 METROCALL P0298897J INV#P0298897J EDMONDS PD PAGER SERVICE 10/27-11/26/06 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 79.59 Total :79.59 91967 11/2/2006 063773 MICROFLEX 00016623 Tax Audit Program Tax Audit Program 001.000.310.514.230.410.00 101.48 Total :101.48 91968 11/2/2006 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 35401 RENTALS RENTALS: LECTERN, LAPEL MIKE 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 75.00 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 6.68 Total :81.68 91969 11/2/2006 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 35383 FAC MAINT - BACKPACK BLOWER FAC MAINT - BACKPACK BLOWER 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 431.96 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 38.44 22Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :470.409196911/2/2006 020900 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 91970 11/2/2006 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0299521-IN UNIT 487 - FILTERS UNIT 487 - FILTERS 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 75.00 FLEET INVENTORY - FILTERS 511.000.000.141.170.000.00 141.36 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.45 Sales Tax 511.000.000.141.170.000.00 12.15 UNIT 46 - FILTERS0300122-IN UNIT 46 - FILTERS 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 122.79 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.44 Total :368.19 91971 11/2/2006 065779 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS INC TI-0165372 STREET DEPT - BRACKETS, FOR CAPS, TOPS, STREET DEPT - BRACKETS, FOR CAPS, TOPS, 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 805.00 Total :805.00 91972 11/2/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 323912314-059 C/A 323912314 IT Cell Phone Service 9/25-10/24/06 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 175.03 Total :175.03 91973 11/2/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 976032312-059 COMMUNICATIONS 23Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91973 11/2/2006 (Continued)067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS Admin 001.000.510.522.100.420.00 28.47 Ops 001.000.510.522.200.420.00 324.57 Prevetion 001.000.510.522.300.420.00 76.15 ALS 001.000.510.526.100.420.00 64.20 Total :493.39 91974 11/2/2006 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 0073262 SODIUM BISULFITE SODIUM BISULFITE 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,138.50 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 101.33 Total :1,239.83 91975 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 052882 Office Supplies - HR Office Supplies - HR 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 12.29 Service charge 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 1.00 King County Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 1.08 Total :14.37 91976 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 515876 OFFICE SUPPLIES POSTER BOARD, MASKING TAPE 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 31.98 CHALK, TONER 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 202.38 King County Sales Tax 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 2.81 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 17.81 24Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91976 11/2/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES567773 STENO PADS, PAPER 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 20.14 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.68 OFFICE SUPPLIES580522 COLOR CARTRIDGES FOR LARGE 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 49.84 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 4.39 OFFICE SUPPLIES588881 SUPPORT BELT 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 28.75 King County Sales Tax 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 2.54 OFFICE SUPPLIES643733 TISSUE, BOND PAPER 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 20.78 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.75 OFFICE SUPPLIES684734 POSTER BOARD, PIN HOLDERS 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 44.38 FRONT DESK SHREDDER 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 26.40 King County Sales Tax 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 3.90 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.32 OFFICE SUPPLIES685252 CHISEL MARKERS - DISCOVERY PROGRAM 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 3.43 King County Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 0.22 25Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :465.509197611/2/2006 063511 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 91977 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 125979 Labels, Tape, Velcro Labels, Tape, Velcro 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 56.90 King County Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 5.01 Total :61.91 91978 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 107397 OPS SUPPLIES markers, mousepad 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 36.02 King County Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 3.09 OPS SUPPLIES121692 Stns' copy paper 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 416.64 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 36.67 Total :492.42 91979 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 022783 INV#022783 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD FLEXGRIP PENS FOR PATROL 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 57.60 120 MIN AUDIO CASSETTES FOR DET. 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 71.50 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 5.07 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 6.29 26Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91979 11/2/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC INV#102150 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD102150 SHREDDER FOR ANIMAL CONTROL 001.000.410.521.700.350.00 82.58 CLASSIFICATION FOLDESR - ANDERSON 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 60.60 5 BOXES COPIER LABELS 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 130.00 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.350.00 7.27 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 5.33 King County Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 11.44 Total :437.68 91980 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 724113 520437 CALENDARS/PENS/SCISSORS 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 92.67 King County Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 8.15 520437900704 COFFEE FILTERS/POST ITS/COPIER PAPER 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 63.26 King County Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 5.56 Total :169.64 91981 11/2/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 032850 OFFICE SUPPLIES Audio Cassette Tapes 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 89.00 King County Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.84 27Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91981 11/2/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES074007 Office supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 82.14 King County Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES126394 Office supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 54.65 King County Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 4.81 Total :245.67 91982 11/2/2006 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00043715 UNIT 26 - SHUTDOWN SOL KIT UNIT 26 - SHUTDOWN SOL KIT 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 223.43 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.42 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.67 Total :255.52 91983 11/2/2006 066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 925932 Copier Maint. for PW Copier Maint. for PW 001.000.650.519.910.480.00 111.86 Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.480.00 9.96 Total :121.82 91984 11/2/2006 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 39309 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 96.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39711 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 160.00 28Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91984 11/2/2006 (Continued)027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39715 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 160.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39765 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 128.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39773 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 128.00 STORM DEPT -DUMP FEES39775 STORM DEPT -DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 128.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39783 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 128.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39803 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 144.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39808 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 160.00 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES39809 STORM DEPT - DUMP FEES 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 110.00 Total :1,342.00 91985 11/2/2006 066817 PANASONIC DIGITAL DOCUMENT COM 9234190 ADMIN LEASE Admin copier 001.000.510.522.100.450.00 137.06 Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.100.450.00 12.20 Total :149.26 91986 11/2/2006 027148 PARAMOUNT SUPPLY CO 497935 315400 29Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91986 11/2/2006 (Continued)027148 PARAMOUNT SUPPLY CO SIX HAYWARD VALVES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 402.12 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.50 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 35.96 315400507377 VALVE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 308.14 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.25 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 27.66 Total :786.63 91987 11/2/2006 071386 PARK, BYONG 1-03350 20260727-408 SDF UTILITY REFUND 20260727-408 UB Refund 1-03350~ 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 13.21 Total :13.21 91988 11/2/2006 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.475096 PW - LOCKER DOOR - BONDO, PAINT PW - LOCKER DOOR - BONDO, PAINT 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 10.02 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.89 Total :10.91 91989 11/2/2006 071362 PEACHTREE BUSINESS PRODUCTS P125192600012 PARKING STICKERS Employee Parking stickers 121.000.340.517.900.310.00 355.00 Total :355.00 91990 11/2/2006 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 26009-00006 E5AB.SR99 Study thru 09/24/06 E5AB.SR99 Study thru 09/24/06 001.000.620.532.200.410.00 5,020.65 30Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :5,020.659199011/2/2006 063951 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 91991 11/2/2006 069633 PET PROS EPD-002 INV#EPD-002 EDMONDS PD NUTRO HIGH ENERGY DOG FOOD - ROCKY 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 475.08 PRECISE PLUS FOOD - DASH 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 456.72 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 79.20 Total :1,011.00 91992 11/2/2006 071385 PRELL, ALLAN 8-50069 06-1398LK UTILITY REFUND 06-1398 LK UB Refund 8-50069 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 5.60 Total :5.60 91993 11/2/2006 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 24 HOUR ALARM MONITORING-PARKS~ 24 HOUR ALARM MONITORING-PARKS~ 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 43.43 24 HOUR ALARM MONITORING-PARKS~ 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 43.42 Fire Monitoring F/S 16~ 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 90.00 Total :176.85 91994 11/2/2006 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0011189-IN EDMCITW SAFETY SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 77.95 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 6.55 EDMCITW0011237-IN FIRST AID SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 56.36 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 4.73 Total :145.59 31Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91995 11/2/2006 030400 PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 06180S-4 Q4-06 2006 Clean Air Assessment per RCW Q4-06 2006 Clean Air Assessment per RCW 001.000.390.531.700.510.00 4,675.75 Total :4,675.75 91996 11/2/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 7918807004 YOST POOL YOST POOL 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 151.42 Total :151.42 91997 11/2/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 0101874006 LIBRARY LIBRARY 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 110.50 PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP0230757007 PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 229.35 LIFT STATION #71916766007 LIFT STATION #7 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 53.38 PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCIL2753166004 PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCEL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 425.65 PUBLIC WORKS2776365005 PUBLIC WORKS 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 16.00 PUBLIC WORKS 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 80.01 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 65.61 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 65.61 PUBLIC WORKS 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 92.81 LIFT STATION #132986629000 LIFT STATION #13 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 79.57 32Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 91997 11/2/2006 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE5254926008 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 173.99 SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009 SEWER LIFT STATION #9 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 19.77 PUBLIC WORKS5903085008 PUBLIC WORKS 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 6.09 PUBLIC WORKS 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 30.43 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 24.95 PUBLIC WORKS 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 24.95 PUBLIC WORKS 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 35.29 PUBLIC SAFETY-FIRE STATION6439566008 PUBLIC SAFETY-FIRE STATION 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 348.21 ANDERSON CENTER6490327001 ANDERSON CENTER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,953.32 LIFT STATION #88851908007 LIFT STATION #8 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 54.64 FIRE STATION #209919661109 FIRE STATION #20 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 165.57 Total :4,055.70 91998 11/2/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 3689976003 VACANT PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING VACANT PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 132.22 33Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :132.229199811/2/2006 046900 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 91999 11/2/2006 070976 QUANTUM ENGINEERING &205-217G (2-1)CITY BLDG HVAC ENERGY ~ CITY BLDG HVAC ENERGY ~ 116.000.651.594.190.650.00 70,382.08 Total :70,382.08 92000 11/2/2006 070976 QUANTUM ENGINEERING &2005-217 B(2)HVAC ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION MGMNT SVCS HVAC ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION MGMNT SVCS 116.000.651.594.190.650.00 10,040.14 Total :10,040.14 92001 11/2/2006 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL 3003550-J STORM - STREET SWEEPING DISPOSAL STORM - STREET SWEEPING DISPOSAL 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 674.68 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 24.30 Total :698.98 92002 11/2/2006 068484 RINKER MATERIALS 9411112205 WATER/SEWER - COLD MIX ASPHALT WATER/SEWER - COLD MIX ASPHALT 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 155.73 WATER/SEWER - COLD MIX ASPHALT 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 155.73 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 13.39 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 13.39 STREET DEPT - ASPHALT9411248331 STREET DEPT - ASPHALT 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 98.00 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 8.62 Total :444.86 92003 11/2/2006 069879 SALTER JOYCE ZIKER PLLC 10562 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES - ~ 810 34Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92003 11/2/2006 (Continued)069879 SALTER JOYCE ZIKER PLLC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES - ~ 810 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 95.00 Total :95.00 92004 11/2/2006 071384 SCHUNACHER, SARAH SCHUNACHER1017 REFUND CLASS REFUND 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 60.00 Total :60.00 92005 11/2/2006 070165 SEW-EURODRIVE 847031 GEAR BOXES GEAR BOXES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 941.50 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 40.82 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 87.43 Total :1,069.75 92006 11/2/2006 068177 SHRM 9000960480 SHRM Membership - 2/1/07 - 1/31/08, D. SHRM Membership - 2/1/07 - 1/31/08, D. 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 160.00 Total :160.00 92007 11/2/2006 069219 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES COR 4322845 39022 RENTAL DI TANKS 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 198.00 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 17.42 Total :215.42 92008 11/2/2006 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0052410-IN UNIT 474 - SUPER LED FLAT MT RED UNIT 474 - SUPER LED FLAT MT RED 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 570.00 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 27.00 35Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :597.009200811/2/2006 068489 068489 SIRENNET.COM 92009 11/2/2006 036955 SKY NURSERY 254616 GARDENING SUPPLIES FLOWERS, FERTILIZER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 80.19 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.06 GARDENING SUPPLIES254638 ANNUALS, MULCH, ETC. 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 86.38 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.60 GARDENING SUPPLIES254639 MULCH 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 19.97 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.76 GARDENING SUPPLIES258337 PLANTS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 156.43 Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.77 Total :373.16 92010 11/2/2006 071248 SLEEP INN - SEATAC 15491 INV#15491 ACCT#276 EDMONDS PD - SUTTON ROOM FOR ACADEMY 10/15-10/19/06 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 249.95 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 31.00 Total :280.95 92011 11/2/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3110774142 UTILITY BILLING 23202 EDMONDS WAY 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 120.25 36Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92011 11/2/2006 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 BALLINGER PARK IRRIGATION5680012803 BALLINGER PARK IRRIGATION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 28.77 Total :149.02 92012 11/2/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 112-000-511-9 22000 84TH AVE W Traffic Signal 220th St SW & 84th Ave W 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 59.02 LIFT STATION #82060018765 LIFT STATION #8 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 61.31 BEACON LIGHT CROSS WALK2180017895 BEACON LIGHT CROSS WALK 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 32.91 SIGNAL LIGHT2710014826 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 95.52 SIGNAL LIGHT2900012432 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 29.74 METERING STATION3120025840 METERING STATION 411.000.656.538.800.470.00 30.23 DECORATIVE LIGHTS 115 2ND AVE S3260494996 deocrative lighting 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 37.35 Ballinger Lift Station 7403 Ballinger3900430020 Ballinger Lift Station 7403 Ballinger 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.74 STREET LIGHT4220016176 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 179.95 Lift Station #6 100 Pine St4670302498 Lift Station #6 100 Pine St 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 175.92 37Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92012 11/2/2006 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL4680011956 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 59.64 CITY HALL5410010689 CITY HALL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,187.35 SIGNAL LIGHT5450010938 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 168.49 SIGNAL LIGHT5450011118 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 135.92 LIFT STATION #15720013258 LIFT STATION #1 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 780.45 Total :4,063.54 92013 11/2/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 178015143 958-001-000-8 WWTP ELECTRICITY 411.000.656.538.800.471.61 20,757.20 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.61 1,245.43 Total :22,002.63 92014 11/2/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3630019994 SIGNAL LIGHT SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 84.66 FIRE STATION #204650022645 FIRE STATION #20 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 593.84 SIGNAL LIGHT5240017631 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 40.39 Total :718.89 38Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92015 11/2/2006 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 32521 Rubber stamps for DSD Rubber stamps for DSD 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 72.10 Total :72.10 92016 11/2/2006 061224 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOMORROW 2006 Dues 2006 Dues Sno Co Tomorrow 2006 Dues Sno Co Tomorrow 001.000.390.519.900.490.00 8,552.00 Total :8,552.00 92017 11/2/2006 062280 SOUND SEAL & PACKING CO 10984 MECHANICAL SEALS/BEARINGS MECHANICAL SEALS/BEARINGS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,989.71 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 18.50 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 178.73 Total :2,186.94 92018 11/2/2006 070677 SPRINT Eng Oct 06 Engineering Nextel thru 10/24/06 Engineering Nextel thru 10/24/06 001.000.620.532.200.420.00 537.97 Total :537.97 92019 11/2/2006 040200 STEAM SUPPLY LLC 4446 FAC - STEAM TRAP FAC - STEAM TRAP 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 79.80 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 10.20 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.92 Total :97.92 92020 11/2/2006 067148 STERNBERG LANTERNS INC 00108506 STREET DEPT - GASLITE POST PARTS, REPAIR STREET DEPT - GASLITE POST PARTS, REPAIR 111.000.653.542.640.350.00 2,836.00 39Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :2,836.009202011/2/2006 067148 067148 STERNBERG LANTERNS INC 92021 11/2/2006 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 761397 SEWER - E-1 INSTALLS - ELECT SUPPLIES SEWER - E-1 INSTALLS - ELECT SUPPLIES 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 163.64 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 14.56 YOST PARK - ELECTRIC SUPPLIES765072 YOST PARK - ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 254.11 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 22.62 MCH - 130V LAMPS, ELECT SUPPLIES772797 MCH - 130V LAMPS, ELECT SUPPLIES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 95.17 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.47 Total :558.57 92022 11/2/2006 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 7527 TELEMETRY SYSTEM PROF SYSTEMS TLELEMETRY SYSTEM PROF SYSTEMS 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 14,192.50 Total :14,192.50 92023 11/2/2006 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10445609 100323 HEX CAP/FLAT WASHER 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 404.47 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.93 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 36.79 Total :450.19 92024 11/2/2006 070578 TEL WEST COMMUNICATIONS 716931 C/A 20044 PR1-1 City Phone Service 10/21-11-21/06 001.000.390.528.800.420.00 836.10 40Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :836.109202411/2/2006 070578 070578 TEL WEST COMMUNICATIONS 92025 11/2/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1447718 NEWSPAPER AD Filing of Preliminary Budget 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 31.74 NEWSPAPER ADS1448883 Budget Public Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 28.98 NEWSPAPER ADS1448884 CG & CG2 Zones Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 34.50 NEWSPAPER ADS1448885 Sewer Comp Plan Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 30.36 NEWSPAPER ADS1448886 Revenue & Prop Tax Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 30.36 NEWSPAPER ADS1448887 Extend Moratorium (ord.3596) Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 35.88 NEWSPAPER ADS1448888 Extend Moratorium (ord.3595) Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 44.16 Total :235.98 92026 11/2/2006 068655 THE RESTORATION CENTER 200600470 UNIT 124 - Charge for Estimate UNIT 124 - Charge for Estimate 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 162.00 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 14.42 Total :176.42 92027 11/2/2006 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 516258 FAC 41Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 42 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92027 11/2/2006 (Continued)038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR Monthly elevator maint-FAC~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 663.71 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 59.06 MONTHLY ELEVATOR MAINT-LIBRARY516259 Monthly elevator maint-Library~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 657.82 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 58.55 MONITORING-PS516260 monitoring-PS 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 564.33 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 50.23 MONITORING-PS516261 Monitoring-PS~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 33.25 MONTHLY ELEVATOR MAINT-LIBRARY516262 Monthly elevator monitoring-Library~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 50.90 Total :2,137.85 92028 11/2/2006 071387 TIBBS, DIANA AND MICHAEL 2-19425 4201-901923 UTILITY REFUND 4201-901923 UB Refund 2-19425~ 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 49.95 Total :49.95 92029 11/2/2006 071379 TOP DUCK PRODUCTS LLC 1025 INV#1025 EDMONDS PD 5 OZ BOTTLES OF GUNZILLA 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 19.90 16 OZ BOTTLES OF GUNZILLA 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 49.90 Total :69.80 92030 11/2/2006 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 12592 FAC MAINT - CODE KEYS, DUP KEYS, KEY 42Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 43 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92030 11/2/2006 (Continued)042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY FAC MAINT - CODE KEYS, DUP KEYS, KEY 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 101.75 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.06 FAC MAINT - KEY ID'S12611 FAC MAINT - KEY ID'S 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.00 Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.36 Total :115.17 92031 11/2/2006 070767 UNITED RENTAL NORTHWEST INC 60427771-001 STORM DEPT - WACKER STORM DEPT - WACKER 411.000.652.542.400.350.00 2,800.00 Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.350.00 249.20 Total :3,049.20 92032 11/2/2006 044300 US POSTAL SERVICE 36 PERMIT 36 BULK MAIL TRUST Permit 36 Bulk Mail Trust250-00122 001.000.250.514.300.420.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 92033 11/2/2006 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 259793 WATER DEPT - 2" SQ SOCKET - 4 WAY SWIVEL WATER DEPT - 2" SQ SOCKET - 4 WAY SWIVEL 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 29.66 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 9.75 Total :39.41 92034 11/2/2006 070864 VERIZON DIRECTORIES CORP S/P2574677 CUSTOMER # S114983 Superpages.com Oct-06 001.000.390.528.800.420.00 34.95 Total :34.95 92035 11/2/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-AB8-1176 CITY PARK T1 LINE 43Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 44 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92035 11/2/2006 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST City Park T1 Line 10/16-11/16/06 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 406.61 DEDICATED LINE FS #17 TO SNOCOM425-DHO-0667 Dedicated Line FS #17 to Snocom 10/19- 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 350.09 Frame Relay for SnoCom & Internet425-NW2-0887 Frame Relay for SnoCom & Internet 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 280.00 Total :1,036.70 92036 11/2/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-206-1108 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 145.03 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 269.35 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR425-206-1137 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.50 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-1141 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.43 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.22 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-4810 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.17 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 78.32 TELEMETRY STATIONS425-712-0417 TELEMETRY STATIONS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 27.72 TELEMETRY STATIONS 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 27.72 44Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 45 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92036 11/2/2006 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES425-712-8251 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 001.000.650.519.910.420.00 10.33 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 51.67 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.37 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 42.37 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 59.94 PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347 PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 56.89 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM425-775-2455 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 47.34 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 17.73 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 32.93 Total :1,031.03 92037 11/2/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-778-2153 FS #20 PHONE SERVICE FS #20 PHONE SERVICE 001.000.510.522.200.420.00 46.98 FS #16 FRAME RELAY425-FLO-0017 FS #16 FRAME RELAY 001.000.510.528.600.420.00 343.73 FRAME RELAY FOR FS #20 & SNOCOM425-NW4-3726 FRAME RELAY FOR FS #20 & SNOCOM 001.000.510.528.600.420.00 247.00 Total :637.71 45Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 46 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92038 11/2/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-712-0423 03 0260 1032797592 07 AFTER HOURS PHONE 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 53.70 Total :53.70 92039 11/2/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 114.43 Total :114.43 92040 11/2/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 364280677-00001 360-929-3167 cell phone- Jim Kammerer 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 0.94 cell phone- Jim Kammerer 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 0.93 425-238-5456470103273-00001 cell phone-Mike Johnson 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 29.59 Total :31.46 92041 11/2/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2083014074 Laptop Air Card- Bldg Laptop Air Card- Bldg 001.000.620.524.100.420.00 60.04 Total :60.04 92042 11/2/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2082231008 INV#2082231008 ACCT#764226609-00001 SWAT BUS CELL PHONE 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 1.90 Total :1.90 92043 11/2/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2081907520 965420720-00001 PRETREATMENT/CELL 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 36.18 Total :36.18 92044 11/2/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 770096328-00001 425-238-8252 46Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 47 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92044 11/2/2006 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS cell phone-Dave Sittauer 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 6.15 Total :6.15 92045 11/2/2006 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 28195698 1066294 LAB SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 25.78 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 0.79 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 2.37 Total :28.94 92046 11/2/2006 046100 WA ST ASSOC OF FIRE CHIEFS INC 2007 ADMIN MISC '07 Mbrshps 001.000.510.522.100.490.00 850.00 Total :850.00 92047 11/2/2006 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRNG 02007-0134 INV#2007-0134 - B.MCINTYRE/EDMONDS PD B.MCINTYRE - TRAINING~ 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 100.00 Total :100.00 92048 11/2/2006 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRNG 2007-0189 INV#2007-0189 - JOB FAIR FEE FALL JOB FAIR - WSCJTC 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 100.00 Total :100.00 92049 11/2/2006 045515 WABO 10655 Reg Fee/Zulauf Uniform Plumbing Class Reg Fee/Zulauf Uniform Plumbing Class 001.000.620.524.100.490.00 125.00 Total :125.00 92050 11/2/2006 070264 WASHINGTON OAKES RETIREMENT 326 Assisted Care Living for James Martin Assisted Care Living for James Martin 009.000.390.517.370.290.00 3,720.00 47Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 48 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :3,720.009205011/2/2006 070264 070264 WASHINGTON OAKES RETIREMENT 92051 11/2/2006 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 5202 INV#5202 EDMONDS PD OEM PHONE HOLSTERS NEXTEL I530 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 77.70 Freight 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 6.13 Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 7.46 Total :91.29 92052 11/2/2006 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 5195 STREET DEPT - 4-BANK ADV TEC NEG PULSE STREET DEPT - 4-BANK ADV TEC NEG PULSE 111.000.653.542.310.350.00 689.00 Freight 111.000.653.542.310.350.00 8.90 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.350.00 62.11 Total :760.01 92053 11/2/2006 049208 WESTERN EQUIP DIST INC 487028 UNIT 118 - FAN BELT UNIT 118 - FAN BELT 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 27.99 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.25 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.10 Total :38.34 92054 11/2/2006 065535 WESTERN FACILITIES SUPPLY 297217-00 UNIT 718 - BLUE WIND SHIELD TOWELS UNIT 718 - BLUE WIND SHIELD TOWELS 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 105.92 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.10 Total :118.02 92055 11/2/2006 045565 WSPCA BINKLEY 2007 MEMBERSHIP - L.BINKLEY/EDMONDS PD 48Page: 11/02/2006 Voucher List City of Edmonds 49 11:39:16AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 92055 11/2/2006 (Continued)045565 WSPCA L.BINKLEY-RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP 2007 001.000.410.521.260.490.00 35.00 2007 MEMBERSHIP - S.HAWLEY/EDMONDS PDHAWLEY S.HAWLEY -RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP 2007 001.000.410.521.260.490.00 35.00 2007 MEMBERSHIP -J.MCCLURE/EDMONDS PDMCCLURE J.MCCLURE-NEW MEMBERSHIP 2007 001.000.410.521.260.490.00 45.00 Total :115.00 92056 11/2/2006 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 200 10/06 RETAINER PROSECUTING ATTNY Oct 06 Retainer/Prosecuting Attorney 001.000.360.515.230.410.00 6,000.00 Total :6,000.00 92057 11/2/2006 067375 ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES INC 8100549 Geotech Serv for Bldg Div Geotech Serv for Bldg Div 001.000.620.524.100.410.00 92.50 Total :92.50 Bank total :415,815.41173 Vouchers for bank code :front 415,815.41Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report173 49Page: AM-660 2.D. Claim for Damages Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Linda Hynd, City Clerk's Office Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Barbara Hintzen (amount undetermined). Previous Council Action Not applicable. Narrative A Claim for Damages has been received from the following: Barbara Hintzen 22617 87th Place West Edmonds, WA 98026 (Amount undetermined) Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Hintzen Claim for Damages Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2006 09:48 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/31/2006 10:35 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/31/2006 11:36 AM APRV Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 10/24/2006 10:27 AM Final Approval Date: 10/31/2006 AM-659 2.E. Ordinance Amending Residential Parking Permits Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Duane Bowman, Development Services Time:Consent Department:Development Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action:Approved for Consent Agenda Agenda Memo Subject Proposed ordinance amending Residential Parking Permits. Previous Council Action The City Council passed major revisions to the Parking code in September of 2005. Concern was raised about having residents park all day in the commercial core areas of downtown. Subsequently, the Council passed an amending Ordinance No. 3593 on May 16, 2006 which restricted use of residential parking permits in the downtown retail core area along Fifth Avenue and Main Street. Narrative After passage of Ordinance No. 3593, residents in the those areas complained that they should be able to park at night when there is no demand for the parking. The Downtown Parking Committee reviewed the issue and concurred with the residents that the parking code should be amended to allow use of residential parking permits between the hours of 6 p.m. and 9 a.m. Exhibit 1 is a proposed ordinance that will accomplish this recommendation. Recommendation Adopt the proposed ordinance. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - Residential Parking Ord Amendment Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2006 09:50 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/31/2006 10:35 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/31/2006 11:36 AM APRV Form Started By: Duane Bowman Started On: 10/20/2006 02:28 PM Final Approval Date: 10/31/2006 0006.900000 WSS/gjz 10/27/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE BY REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 8.52 RESIDENTIAL PARKING ZONE REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE FOR LIMITED PERMITS FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, a program for residential parking permits has been established; and WHEREAS, parking is limited in certain portions of the downtown area; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it in the public interest to amend the provisions regarding visitors and residential parking permits to clarify its provisions and applications, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds City Code Chapter 8.52 Residential Parking Zone Regulations is repealed and reenacted to read as follows: Chapter 8.52 RESIDENTIAL PARKING ZONE REGULATIONS Sections: 8.52.010 Residential parking permits defined. 8.52.015 Limitation on issuance. 8.52.020 Eligibility for residential parking permits. 8.52.030 Applications for permits. 8.52.040 Residential parking permit description. 8.52.050 Use and validity of permits. 8.52.060 Visitor’s permits. 8.52.065 Visitor parking on certain streets. {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 8.52.070 Unlawful acts. 8.52.080 Revocation of permits. 8.52.090 Revocation – City clerk’s duties. 8.52.100 Appeal. 8.52.200 Penalties. 8.52.300 Severability. 8.52.010 Residential parking permits defined. When properly issued and displayed, a residential parking permit (permit) shall exempt a specified vehicle, while parked within a specific limited parking zone for which the permit was issued, from citation for parking longer than the posted time limit for that particular zone and no other; provided, that the permit shall not authorize parking for more than 72 consecutive hours in any one location or as specified specifically in this section. The permit shall not guarantee a parking space, nor shall it exempt the vehicle or operator from observing zones where parking is prohibited at all times, including but not limited to no parking zones, load zones, fire zones and all other applicable regulations contained in ECC Title 8. 8.52.015 Limitation on issuance. No permit authorized to be issued under this chapter shall be issued with respect to any commercial or recreational vehicle over 10,000 pounds licensed gross vehicle weight or 22 feet in length except as specifically allowed in this section. 8.52.020 Eligibility for residential parking permits. A. Eligibility. Permits may be issued only to persons who reside within the permit zone for which the permit is issued, who own and/or have legal control of a motor vehicle and only for those motor vehicles owned by or under the legal control of the resident. Permits may be issued to eligible persons who have insufficient off-street parking spaces for the number of cars they own and/or control. For the purposes of this chapter, “residence” shall be defined as the street address of the structure in which the applicant resides as determined by the U.S. Postal Service or such other street upon which the residence fronts and for which the applicant can present adequate evidence that the proposed alternative frontage adequately reflects the actual orientation and location of the structure in which the applicant resides. {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - B. The Proof of Residence. Proof of residence shall be established by: 1. Display of a valid driver’s license reflecting a current address within the zone for which the permit is issued; or 2. Display of a deed, lease, rental agreement or other acceptable document showing residency within the zone for which the permit is issued. C. Ownership of Motor Vehicle. Proof of ownership and/or control of a motor vehicle may be established by possession of a valid registration in the applicant’s name, or by display of a valid registration accompanied by proof that the applicant has legal use and control of the vehicle. 8.52.030 Applications for permits. A. Authorization of City Clerk. The city clerk is hereby authorized to issue permits to qualified residents who own or have control of a motor vehicle, and who have insufficient off-street parking spaces. B. Application Form. Application shall be made on forms provided by the city clerk which shall include: 1. The name, address, telephone number and license number of the applicant; 2. Make, model, color and year of the registration of the vehicle for which the permit is sought; 3. The type of document used to establish eligibility for the permit as required in ECC 8.52.020; 4. The number of off-street parking spaces available to the applicant; 5. License plate number (and state) of vehicle; 6. The number of visitor’s permits requested and issued; and 7. A statement immediately above where the applicant is to sign stating that the applicant has been provided with an opportunity to examine this chapter and is familiar with the terms thereof. All applications shall be signed by the applicant and notarized. {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - C. Limited Parking Zone Determination. The limited parking zone for which the permit is valid shall be the designated zone in which the permit holder resides but is prohibited on Main Street from 3rd Ave to 6th Ave and 5th Ave from Bell Street to Walnut Street except between the hours of 6 p.m. and 9 a.m. Monday through Satuarday. Three zones have been created and are as follows: Red Zone – Caspers Street to Edmonds Street and Sunset Avenue to Sixth Avenue. Blue Zone – Edmonds Street to Dayton Street and Railroad Avenue to Sixth Avenue. Yellow Zone – Dayton Street to Pine Street and SR 104 to Sixth Avenue. D. Fees/Notification to Police Chief. 1. Fees for the permit shall be $10.00 for the first vehicle, $10.00 for the second vehicle and $10.00 for the third vehicle. No fee will be required for limited recreational vehicle permits. 2. Fees shall be collected prior to issuance of the permit. A copy of all permits issued shall be promptly sent to the police chief as well as notification that a permit has been revoked or suspended. 3. No more than three permits shall be issued to any one residence. 8.52.040 Residential parking permit description. The permit shall contain the following information: A. The make, model, color, year, license plate number and registration of the vehicle; B. The limited parking zone for which it is issued; and C. The expiration date of the permit. 8.52.050 Use and validity of permits. A. Display. Permits shall be displayed in the lower right hand corner of the vehicle’s rear window. B. Validity. Permits shall be valid only for the vehicle for which they are issued, only in the zone designated and only so long as the permit holder retains the vehicle and resides at the address specified in his or her application. C. Expiration. Permits shall expire one year from the date of issue, so long as the permit holder retains the permit vehicle and resides at the address specified in his/her permit application. {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - Permits issued for a recreational vehicle are limited to a period of 36 hours and no more than 6 permits may be issued for an individual recreational vehicle in any one year period 8.52.060 Visitor’s permits. A. The city clerk is hereby authorized to issue visitor’s permits which shall be valid for a period of up to one year. The clerk may issue up to two visitor’s permits per residential address. Visitor’s permits may be issued to one individual residing at each residential address who can provide the proof of residence required by ECC 8.52.020(B). B. The fee for visitor permits shall be: 1. $5.00 per visitor’s permit for an individual holding a valid residential parking permit; or 2. $10.00 per visitor’s permit for persons who do not hold a valid residential parking permit. Visitor’s permits shall be issued in conjunction with the issuance or renewal of a residential parking permit, for those individuals who hold a valid residential parking permit or for the calendar year or any unexpired portion thereof for other qualified applicants. 8.52.065 Visitor parking on certain streets. Visitor’s permits shall be issued by the city clerk to residents of Sunset Avenue, and the portion of 75th Place West, north of North Meadowdale Road, without showing a lack of off-street parking or vehicle ownership. Such visitor’s permits shall be issued at no cost to the applicant. Such visitor’s permits shall be limited to two permits per household or residence. These permits shall only be valid for parking after the posted hours on the west side of Sunset Avenue from Bell Street to Caspers Street. Such permits shall be valid on either side of 75th Place West, north of North Meadowdale Road. All other provisions of this chapter, where not inconsistent with this section, and the adopted parking regulations of the Revised Code of Washington, shall apply. 8.52.070 Unlawful acts. It shall be unlawful for any person to do any of the following: A. To make any false or misleading statement in application for a permit; {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 - B. To transfer the permit to another person or vehicle; C. To fraudulently alter a permit or visitor’s permit in any respect whatsoever; D. To improperly display the permit or visitor’s permit or to violate any terms or conditions under which the permit or visitor’s permit was issued; E. Use or place the permit on any other vehicle than that for which the permit is issued; or F. To use or permit to be used a revoked or suspended permit. 8.52.080 Revocation of permits. Permits and/or visitor’s permits may be revoked by the city clerk for any of the following reasons: A. The permit holder has made any false, misleading or incomplete statement in the application; B. Violation of any of the provisions of this chapter; or C. Overissuance of permits; provided, however, that in the event of revocation for overissuance, priority shall be given to providing one permit per dwelling unit. 8.52.090 Revocation – City clerk’s duties. If the city clerk finds that a permit and/or visitor’s permit should be revoked for any of the reasons set forth in ECC 8.52.080, the clerk shall send a written notice to the permit holder at the address contained on the application. The notice shall contain the following information: A. Advise the permit holder that the permit and/or visitor’s permit will be revoked on a specified date which shall be not fewer than 10 or more than 13 days from the date of the letter; B. Advise the permit holder that unless a written notice of appeal setting forth the reasons for the appeal is filed with the city clerk not later than the date set forth in subsection (A) of this section, the permit will be deemed revoked; C. Advise the permit holder that if a written notice of appeal is filed within the required time, the date, time and place of the hearing will be set; and {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 - D. The reasons for the revocation. 8.52.100 Appeal. Upon receipt of the appeal, the mayor or his designee shall set a date for hearing within 30 days of receipt of the notice of appeal and notify the appellant of the date, time and place of hearing. The mayor or his designee shall render the decision within 10 days after the hearing is closed, reduce the decision to writing and include a statement of reasons for the decision. The mayor or his designee may affirm or reverse the revocation decision or order suspension for a specified period. 8.52.200 Penalties. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof be punished as set forth in ECC 5.50.020. 8.52.300 Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, phrase or word of this chapter, or any provision adopted by reference in this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this chapter. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 - APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 8 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE BY REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 8.52 RESIDENTIAL PARKING ZONE REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE FOR LIMITED PERMITS FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS644804.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 9 - AM-671 2.F. Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Approval of Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza and proposed ordinance amending City Code Section 4.04.030, Leases of Public Right-of-Way. Previous Council Action On September 18, 2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3604, amending the provisions of the Edmonds City Code to adopt a new Chapter 4.04 entitled Concession Agreements. Narrative During this past year, Richard Andrews, owner of Old Milltown Pizza, has been working with the During this past year, Richard Andrews, owner of Old Milltown Pizza, has been working with the city regarding the ability to use the city's right-of-way in order to place a trailer on the right-of-way to vend food and beverages. The site he has proposed is located at James Street immediately east of the ferry holding lanes and is adjacent to the SR 104 park. The City Attorney and Development Services Director proposed entering into an agreement for this purpose and on September 18, 2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3604 that allows for Concession Agreements to be entered into for the lease of public right-of-way space. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the September 18 Council Minutes, and Exhibit 2 is a copy of Ordinance No. 3604. While drafting the Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza, it was found that Ordinance No. 3604 needed to be clarified in order to ensure that additional licenses or agreements would not be required. Therefore, the City Attorney prepared a memorandum and proposed ordinance that amends a section of Ordinance No. 3604 as follows: 4.04.030 Leases of public right of way. "A. “Public right of way” shall mean property held for street or alley purposes and shall typically be limited to unopened City right of way. The lease of public right of way developed for street purposes shall comply with the street vendor’s ordinance and/or incorporate applicable terms from the street use provisions of Chapter 18.70 as applicable." Exhibit 3 is a copy of the City Attorney's Memorandum, and Exhibit 4 is a copy of the proposed amending ordinance. Attached as Exhibit 5 is a Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza for the lease of city right-of-way. The monthly fee is $100.00 and the term of the agreement is 12/1/06 to 12/31/07. Recommendation Authorize the Mayor to sign the Concession Agreement with Old Milltown Pizza, and adopt the ordinance amending the provisions of Section 4.04.030, Leases of Public Right-of-Way. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - 09-18-06 Council Minutes Link: Exhibit 2 - Ordinance 3604 Link: Exhibit 3 - Attorney Memo Link: Exhibit 4 - Proposed Ordinance Link: Exhibit 5 - Concession Agreement Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 Development Services Duane Bowman 11/01/2006 12:35 PM APRV 2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 12:38 PM APRV 3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/01/2006 01:28 PM APRV 4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 01:52 PM APRV Started On: 11/01/2006 11:08 Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/01/2006 11:08 AM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2006 A Member of the International Lawyers Network with independent member law firms worldwide 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2100 • Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • 206.447.7000 • Fax: 206.447.0215 • Web: www.omwlaw.com {WSS644832.DOC;1/00006.900000/} MEMORANDUM DATE: October 30, 2006 TO: City Council Members City of Edmonds FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorney RE: Milltown Pizza Concession Agreement Attached is a copy of a Concession Agreement revised in accordance with staff comments and negotiations with Milltown Pizza. I have also attached an ordinance amending the provisions of ECDC 4.04.030, paragraph A. The intent of the original amendment incorporated in Ordinance No. 3604 was to make the process easier. Staff points out that the original language would have required additional licensing review rather than replacing licensing as was the intent of the Concession Agreement. WSS:gjz Attachments {WSS644833.DOC;1/00006.090000/} - 1 - 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 10/27/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4.04.030 LEASES OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, PARAGRAPH A, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 3604 was enacted in order to provide for streamlined methodology for the lease of public right of way space; and WHEREAS, certain language within the ordinance could be interpreted to require additional licenses or agreements; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds City Code, Section 4.04.030 Leases of Public Right of Way, paragraph A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4.04.030 Leases of public right of way. A. “Public right of way” shall mean property held for street or alley purposes and shall typically be limited to unopened city right of way. The lease of public right of way developed for street purposes shall incorporate applicable terms from the street use provisions of Chapter 18.70. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect {WSS644833.DOC;1/00006.090000/} - 2 - five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {WSS644833.DOC;1/00006.090000/}- 3 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4.04.030 LEASES OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, PARAGRAPH A, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} CONCESSION AGREEMENT COMES NOW, the City of Edmonds, Washington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter “City”) and Milltown Pizza, a Washington ________________ [insert partnership, corporation, etc., as applicable] (hereinafter “Concessionaire”) under the terms and conditions set forth herein: 1. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this Concession Agreement is to authorize the temporary use as described herein of the unopened right of way of James Street immediately east of the ferry holding lanes and adjacent to the SR 104 park. This Concession Agreement is a legislative action of the Council, and as provided herein, may be terminated by the Council at any time. The Concessionaire is authorized to use the location to sell food and beverages other than alcoholic beverages. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to relieve the Concessionaire of obtaining the approval of any necessary state or local entity, including requirements to obtain business and street use permits as referenced in this Agreement. 2. Premises. This Concession Agreement authorizes the use of certain unopened street right of way shown on the attached Exhibit A to the Concessionaire (hereinafter the “Premises”). The unopened right of way of James Street, is shown on the attached Exhibit A incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Nothing herein shall be construed to authorize the Concessionaire to enter into the ferry holding lanes without the permission of the Washington State Department of Transportation nor to vend its products in any location other than the Premises. 3. Undertakings of Concessionaire. In consideration of the benefits of this Agreement, the Concessionaire promises and agrees to: 3.1 Utilize the leased premises for the maintenance of a temporary structure. The temporary structure is a trailer as shown on the attached Exhibits B and C, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. This temporary structure (hereinafter “Trailer”) shall comply in respects with the State Building Code and the requirements of the Snohomish County Health Department. 3.2 Pay to the City the sum of $100.00 per month. Such sum shall be paid on or before the first day of each month. Any payment not received by the fifth business day of each and every month shall be subject to a $25 service charge. Failure to remit the lease payment and service charge by the 15th day of each month shall be grounds for immediate termination of these provisions. In addition, an additional service charge of $25 shall be added for every period of five (5) business days thereafter. 3.3 Obtain a business license from the City for this location in accordance with the Edmonds City Code. 3.4 The Concessionaire shall provide a certificate of insurance naming the City as an additional named insured. The policy shall provide public liability protection in the {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} minimum amount of $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in aggregate. The insurance policy shall be primary as to any other policy of insurance. It shall provide that the policy may not be cancelled except upon the provision of thirty (30) days written notice to the City. The trailer to be installed is a temporary structure which does not require architectural design review in accordance with the provisions of ECDC 18.70.030. 3.5 No sales of retail goods or services other than the selling of food or beverages shall be permitted. By way of illustration and not limitation, no sale of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted from this location. 3.6 Promise to indemnify and hold harmless, on behalf of Milltown Pizza, the undersigned owner and successors, heirs and assigns, the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any claim, loss or liability of any kind or nature arising from or out of the use of the Premises and/or the terms and conditions of this Agreement. To the extent necessary to enforce this promise, the Concessionaire as a part of the negotiation of the provisions of this Agreement, waives the immunities of Title 51 RCW to, but only to, the limited extent necessary to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees. 3.7 Concessionaire may terminate this Agreement on the provision of thirty (30) days written notice. 3.8 In the event of termination, Concessionaire shall restore the site to its original condition and remove all structures, temporary or permanent by the date of termination. The City may, at its option, seize any personal property, temporary structure or other object or item left on the site and sell it in the event that it is not removed by the date of termination set in the notice from Concessionaire. The City may, at its option, restore the site and bill Concessionaire for the reasonable cost or restoration of the site to its original condition. If Concessionaire fails to pay the sum within thirty (30) days, the parties agree that the City may forward the sum to a collection agency for recovery. Concessionaire shall be responsible for any costs associated with such recovery including reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs and the charges of the collection agency. 4. Obligations of the City. The City shall: 4.1 Make available the unopened street right of way of James Street to the Concessionaire to vend food and beverage, provided, however, that nothing herein shall be interpreted to authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages from the site. 4.2 The City Council, in its sole legislative discretion, reserves the right under this Agreement to terminate its provisions at any time upon the provision of forty-eight (48) written notice. In addition, the City Council reserves the right to seek proposals for the leased premises or any other property or unopened right of way of the City for competitive bids from other vendors at such time and through such a process as in its sole discretion shall determine appropriate. The Concessionaire shall be provided an opportunity in any such future process to make a proposal on the same terms as other proposals, but shall have no competitive advantage in the process. The lease payments provided in paragraph 3.2 above are specifically set at a {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} lower rate than market rates to acknowledge that this Concession Agreement is terminable at will. In the event of termination by the City, the City shall return a pro-rata portion of any prepaid rent. 5. Term. This Agreement, unless earlier terminated as herein provided, shall expire on December 31, 2007. 6. Entire Agreement. This is the entire agreement between the parties. It shall not be amended except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. DONE this _______ day of _____________, 2006. MILLTOWN PIZZA By: Its: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _________________________ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the ____________________ of MILLTOWN PIZZA to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: ___________________ NOTARY PUBLIC Printed Name: My appointment expires: CITY OF EDMONDS By: Mayor Gary Haakenson ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: By: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: W. Scott Snyder, City Attorney {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} EXHIBIT A {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} EXHIBIT B {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} EXHIBIT C {WSS643295.DOC;1/00006.900000/} AM-680 3. City Attorney Annual Report Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By: Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:10 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject City Attorney Annual Report Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Scott Snyder, City Attorney, will present his annual report to the City Council. Recommendation Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments No file(s) attached. Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:49 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 03:53 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:56 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/02/2006 03:47 PM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 AM-670 4. Municipal Court Judge Annual Report Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Doug Fair, Municipal Court Time:10 Minutes Department:Municipal Court Type:Information Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject 2006 Annual Report - Municipal Court Judge Previous Council Action Narrative I have filed the report along with the attachments under the attachments section. There should also be hard copies in your packets. Please note that the appendices with the audit report are in hard copy only. Recommendation Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: 2006 Annual Report Link: 2006 Net Revenues Link: 2006 expenditures Link: 2006 filings and revenue charts Link: 2006 AOC Audit Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 09:00 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 10:01 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:39 PM APRV Form Started By: Doug Fair Started On: 11/01/2006 09:01 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 EDMONDS MUNICIPAL COURT 2006 COUNCIL REPORT ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ COURT OPERATIONS I. Financial Report In the attachments you will see a summary of our financial picture to date. As you can see our filings have increased approximately 25% over 2005. Revenues will also exceed expectations; however, the increase will likely be in the 10%−15% range. As I had discussed last year, the new hires by the police department and the change in driving while license suspended laws have reversed the declining trends evident since 2002. I anticipate an increase in filings for the next year or two as more officers come “on-line”. For example, the street crimes unit has not yet started to have an impact on filings. However it is not anticipated that the rate of increase will continue at 25% per year. On the expense side of the ledger, it is anticipated that we will come in very close to our original budget estimates as a whole. Our only unanticipated expenses were a jump in interpreter fees and EHM expenses. As a result it is likely that we will be requesting a budget extension in the range of 2%-4%. We have adjusted our expense estimates for 2007-8. II. Edmonds Municipal Court as a Passport Agency The Edmonds Municipal Court received its Passport Agent Designation Certificate in March of 2002, from the US Bureau of Consular Affairs. In order to receive this special status each court clerk was required to undergo an intensive all day training session at the Seattle Passport Agency in the Federal Building in Seattle. The 1 of 9 11/3/2006 session focused on the acceptance process, minimum passport requirements, identifying complex citizenship documents, identification, fraud issues and applications for minors. To date, Edmonds Municipal Court clerks have processed 660 applications, netting an accrued revenue equaling $19,790. We anticipate a downturn in processed applications and revenue from previous years. We will monitor the trend over the next year to determine what action, if any, needs to be taken. III. Live Scan Fingerprinting Edmonds Municipal Court utilizes the cutting edge of technology known as the “Live Scan Management System”. The new technology electronically scans the defendant’s fingerprints and instantly transmits the fingerprints to the Washington State Patrol (WSP) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The scanned fingerprints are cross- matched for identification. This process allows the Probation Officer to monitor criminal defendants more thoroughly and expands the judge’s capacity to protect the citizens of Edmonds from dangerous defendants. Thanks to you, we were able to purchase a second unit that is permanently housed in a small conference room next to the front counter. This has numerous benefits for the court and the police department: we no longer need to move a $9,000 piece of equipment back and forth on a weekly basis; the police always have the equipment available in their booking area for arrests; we always have the equipment available for fingerprinting defendant’s on any day of the week; and, the police clerks can now use the new machine for routine background checks without taking citizens down to the booking area. IV. Court Security Officer The Court Security Officer (CSO) has worked out very well. We have not had any defendants run from the courtroom since we have instituted a security system. It is a great relief to have a 2 of 9 11/3/2006 commissioned officer providing safety and security for our staff and the citizens of Edmonds. V. Audit by Administrative Office of the Courts At the suggestion of Council President Dawson, we requested an audit from the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). AOC does not normally conduct individual audits but they did so in our case because of the concerns as outlined in the introduction portion of the Technical Assistance Report (audit). The results of the audit are included in this report. Overall the results were excellent. Our citizens can be assured that this Court has been, and continues to be, run in a professional and secure manner. AOC referred to our money handling procedures as “exemplary”. There are, of course, some recommendations for improvement. I have passed the first recommendation on to Chief Stern. The next two have been addressed in the budget request for 2007-8. The funds for the enhanced security will be coming from court improvement funds so no new general fund allocation will be required to address these issues. The final recommendation is being addressed by reviewing our fine collection and allocation process. We are collecting information from nearby courts as a part of this process. ALTERNATIVE CONFINEMENT I. Electronic Home Monitoring The Edmonds Municipal Court utilizes “Electronic Home Monitoring” (EHM) as a jail alternative. This enables the judge to be more flexible when determining jail options. EHM eligibility is determined using written criteria based on a statutory scheme developed for felony offenses. A defendant pays the court $15 a day for the EHM equipment that the court rents for $5.75, leaving a $9.75 monetary gain per diem. The amount a defendant pays is 3 of 9 11/3/2006 based on a sliding scale so that those who are less fortunate still have the opportunity to receive EHM. Through September, 2006, income exceeded expenses by $14,834. This is more revenue than was collected for the entire 2005 calendar year The City of Edmonds pays $57 a day for a defendant who is incarcerated in the Snohomish County Jail. In addition, every time a defendant reports to the Snohomish County Jail (is “booked”) a one- time booking fee of $86 is charged to the City. The City of Lynnwood charges $65 a day but has no separate booking fee. These expenses are saved when EHM is ordered in lieu of jail. So far, 2,175 alternative jail days have been imposed by utilizing the EHM program. Using the most conservative estimates ($57 a day without booking fees) the citizens of Edmonds saved $123,975. II. Community Service In addition to EHM the Court offers community service options to defendants. A defendant may provide eight hours of service to a local non-profit agency for each day of jail they were ordered to serve. It was decided to discontinue the program with the Edmonds Parks and Recreation Department after reviewing how rarely the program was utilized and the difficulty in administering the program. Community Service is ideal for a defendant who has received a short jail sentence on a minor offense. It provides an excellent alternative to using jail space and spending tax dollars to house offenders. This program provides an opportunity to “give-back” to our community. To date 91 defendants have provided 2400 hours of community service, saving the taxpayers $17,100 in jail costs. PROBATION SERVICES I. Alcohol Testing Pre-trial 4 of 9 11/3/2006 The Edmonds Municipal Court’s Probation Department uses a handheld breath alcohol-analyzing device. The equipment is a pocketsize machine that comes with individually wrapped and sterilized, disposable mouthpieces, which are designed to read and estimate breath and blood alcohol concentration. The judge can order a defendant to report each day to the Probation Officer for breath alcohol testing. This is known as day reporting. It allows the safe release of defendants who have an alcohol addiction but are otherwise contributing members of the community. In addition, the portable breath-testing device is used when a defendant is in court and the judge or court clerk detects alcohol on his/her breath. This year we started to use an alcohol bracelet monitoring program. The program uses EHM technology together with a testing protocol that monitors alcohol use through routine analysis of the defendant’s sweat. This option provides 24/7 monitoring with virtually instantaneous feedback. It also allows for monitoring defendants who do not live in the area. Post-trial A defendant who has been convicted of an offense can be ordered in for day reporting or alcohol monitoring EHM. II. Compliance The Probation Officer monitors all defendants who have been convicted of crimes to ensure they are following the requirements of their Judgment and Sentence. Common examples of requirements include: no new criminal law violations; alcohol and drug evaluations with follow-up; a DUI victim’s panel; domestic violence batterer’s treatment and restitution. If a defendant is non-compliant, he/she will be summonsed back to court for a probation violation hearing. At the hearing the judge may order an increase in fines or jail for non-compliant behavior. 5 of 9 11/3/2006 STAFF DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATION I. Court Manager The Edmonds Municipal Court Administrator, Joan Ferebee, attended local and national conferences covering a multitude of issues relevant to limited jurisdiction courts. Some of the topics covered include court security, cultural sensitivity, media relations, web page development, government interrelationships and staff management/ development. II. Staff Development The entire staff attends educational seminars sponsored by the District and Municipal Court Management Association. The program covers a wide variety of subjects including customer service, access to justice, electronic ticketing and the new computer database. III. Probation In Addition to the training received by all staff the Probation Officer received specialized training. This training included the treatment recovery process, interventions, Department of Licensing update, current laws, and the impacts of specialized courts. IV. Judicial Training All new judges were required to attend Judicial College in February, 2006. This week-long residential program provided intensive instruction on many aspects of becoming a judge. In addition to legal instruction the course covered the personal and professional challenges of the judiciary. In June, 2006 an annual judicial education seminar was attended. The sessions updated judges on the most recent changes in the law and the policies that impact their courts. Of particular interest was a presentation on the theories and impacts of sentencing. 6 of 9 11/3/2006 In December, 2006 there will be a presiding judges’ conference. The focus of the conference will be on leadership and human resources management. PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INTERACTION I. Juror Survey and Waiting Area The backbone of the Edmonds Municipal Court jury system is the individual juror. In an effort to determine what areas of the system can be improved, the Court Administrator developed a juror survey. This survey, instituted this year, had an immediate impact. As a result of comments minor changes were made during the check-in procedure. The responses to the survey were overwhelmingly positive. A new juror waiting area was also utilized this year. In the past the initial juror panel was sequestered in the small hallway and juror deliberation room that is adjacent to the courtroom. Sometimes 20 jurors were crammed into this space with some jurors forced to sit on the floor. The police department has been very cooperative in allowing jurors to use the training room. II. Web Page We have been in the process of developing a web page that will enhance customer service and access to justice. Along with basic information about Edmonds Municipal Court we anticipate that the site will provide many useful tools for the public. Among the items we are incorporating will be an opportunity to make payments on- line, access to public records and criminal history, find a court date, obtain important contact information, and schedule and submit traffic infraction hearings by e-mail. III. Mock Trial and Court Visits 7 of 9 11/3/2006 This year the Edmond’s Boys and Girls Club used the court facility to stage two mock trials. The Court also was visited by students from a local elementary school. These interactions provided an educational opportunity for the students and helped to introduce them to a fundamental part of our governmental system. IV. Access to Judicial Information System (JIS) The Court experimented with providing a terminal and instructions for access to the JIS. The system is very old and requires codes to navigate the site. As much, or more, staff time was devoted to explaining the system as was used to print out the information. AOC is in the process of updating the system so that it is available on a web-based browser. Once this process is completed we will reconsider providing a public terminal at the Court. 2007 GOALS PUBLIC ACCESS AND INTERACTION Edmonds Municipal Court will continue to work on items II, III and IV, above. Our goal is to provide public access and education about the court system, in general, and specifically about Edmonds Municipal Court. It is important that our citizens feel that they understand their court, how it operates, and its relationship to government as a whole. It is also important that we provide outstanding public service on a timely and professional basis. ACCURATE EXPENSE AND REVENUE PROJECTIONS Our projections for 2006 were fairly accurate. Good projections are dependant on an accurate assessment of factors that impact court operations. Most of these factors are beyond the Court’s immediate control: filings, officer staffing and priorities, mandatory jail sentences, etc. Maintaining good communication with other 8 of 9 11/3/2006 departments and a little bit of luck also helps provide a basis for good projections. As noted above, we are currently reviewing our fine allocation and collection policies. While a court should never be looked to as a “revenue generator”, we are mindful of the precious tax dollars we are entrusted to manage. The citizens of Edmonds have a right to expect an open and accountable Edmonds Municipal Court. 9 of 9 11/3/2006 REVENUES 01/01/06 through 9/30/06 Adjusted Estimate Year-to-date Revenues Balance Prct Rcvd 336.060.260. CRIMINAL JUSTICE - SPECIAL PROGRAMS 30,000.00 25,829.26 4,170.74 86.10 336.060.510 DUI - CITIES 8,750.00 4,971.10 3,778.90 56.81 338.120.000 SHARED COURT COSTS 0.00 7,280.78 -7,280.78 0.00 341.220.000 MUNICIPAL COURT CIVIL FILINGS 0.00 20.70 -20.70 0.00 341.310.000 RECORD/LEGAL INSTRUMTS 1,000.00 1,509.00 -509.00 150.90 341.320.000 COURT RECORD SERVICES 1,000.00 300.83 699.17 30.08 341.320.040 WARRANT FEES 0.00 89.76 -89.76 0.00 341.350.000 COURT-OTHER CERT/CC FEE 0.00 3.34 -3.34 0.00 341.620.000 MUNIC.-DIST. COURT CURR EXPEN 0.00 99.51 -99.51 0.00 341.990.000 PASSPORTS AND NATURALIZATION FEES 45,000.00 20,310.00 24,690.00 45.13 342.330.000 ADULT PROBATION SERVICE CHARGE 100,000.00 99,297.98 702.02 99.30 342.360.010 ELECTRONIC MONITORING 10,000.00 19,240.00 -9,240.00 192.40 342.360.030 ELECTRONIC MONITOR DUI 10,000.00 4,960.00 5,040.00 49.60 342.370.000 BOOKING FEES 4,000.00 3,819.78 180.22 95.49 342.500.000 EMERGENCY SERVICE FEES 7,242.00 6,279.94 962.06 86.72 342.600.000 DUI EMERGENCY AID 0.00 47.03 -47.03 0.00 342.900.010 CRIM CNV FEE DUI 0.00 13.86 -13.86 0.00 342.900.020 CRIM CONV FEE CT 0.00 2,318.64 -2,318.64 0.00 342.900.030 CRIM CONV FEE CN 0.00 1,721.66 -1,721.66 0.00 352.300.000 PROOF OF VEHICLE INS PENALTY 4,000.00 3,151.12 848.88 78.78 353.100.000 TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 60,000.00 31,064.36 28,935.64 51.77 353.100.020 BC TRAFFIC INFRACTION 150,000.00 144,515.06 5,484.94 96.34 353.700.000 NON-TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 6,000.00 24,192.75 -18,192.75 403.21 354.000.000 PARKING INFRACTION PENALTIES 20,000.00 33,748.00 -13,748.00 168.74 354.000.010 PR - HANDICAPPED 5,000.00 2,055.00 2,945.00 41.10 354.000.030 PARKING INFRACTION LOC 0.00 280.00 -280.00 0.00 355.200.000 DWI PENALTIES 10,000.00 2,579.53 7,420.47 25.80 355.800.000 OTHER CRIMINAL TRAF MISDEM PEN 20,000.00 1,628.19 18,371.81 8.14 355.800.010 CRIMINAL TRAFFIC MISDEMEANOR 8/03 17,000.00 13,204.23 3,795.77 77.67 356.900.000 OTHER NON-TRAF MISDEMEANOR PEN 3,000.00 620.80 2,379.20 20.69 356.900.040 OTHER NON TRAFFIC MISD. 8/03 8,000.00 5,399.25 2,600.75 67.49 356.900.080 COURT DV PENALTY ASSESSMENT 0.00 157.85 -157.85 0.00 357.300.000 CRIMINAL COSTS-RECOUPMENTS 90,000.00 89,408.72 591.28 99.34 357.330.000 PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOUPMENT 10,000.00 16,312.41 -6,312.41 163.12 357.350.000 COURT INTERPRETER COST 2,000.00 673.61 1,326.39 33.68 359.900.000 MISC FINES AND PENALTIES 5,000.00 15,990.00 -10,990.00 319.80 362.300.000 PARKING 4,000.00 2,900.00 1,100.00 72.50 369.900.030 NSF FEES - MUNICIPAL COURT 200.00 204.52 -4.52 102.26 TOTAL 631,192.00 586,198.57 44,993.43 92.87% O Expenditure Status Report 01/01/06 through 9/30/06 Account Number Adjusted Appropriation Year-to-date Expenditures Balance Prct Used 512.500 MUNICIPAL COURT 512.500.110.00 SALARIES 299,029 227,718 71,311 76.15 512.500.120.00 OVERTIME - 82 (82) 0.00 512.500.230.00 BENEFITS 70,901 50,238 20,663 70.86 512.500.310.00 SUPPLIES 4,500 3,520 980 78.22 512.500.350.00 MINOR EQUIPMENT 1,550 1,214 336 78.34 512.500.410.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,656 14,370 6,286 69.57 512.500.420.00 COMMUNICATIONS - 19 (19) 0.00 512.500.430.00 TRAVEL 2,500 888 1,612 35.52 512.500.450.00 RENTAL/LEASE 500 189 311 37.71 512.500.480.00 REPAIR/MAINT 100 434 (334) 434.39 512.500.490.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,000 1,585 415 79.27 512.500.490.01 INTERPETER FEES 11,000 12,452 (1,452) 113.20 512.530.490.00 MISC - WITNESS - 523 (523) 0.00 Total 412,736 313,232 99,504 75.89% 512.501 PROBATION 512.501.110.00 SALARIES 98,727 74,858 23,869 75.82 512.501.120.00 OVERTIME - 532 (532) - 512.501.230.00 BENEFITS 42,022 30,761 11,261 73.20 512.501.310.00 SUPPLIES 10,000 6,140 3,860 61.40 512.501.350.00 SMALL EQUIPMENT 250 - 250 - 512.501.420.00 COMMUNICATIONS - 151 (151) - 512.501.430.00 TRAVEL 500 117 383 23.48 512.501.450.00 RENTAL/LEASE 1,600 1,255 345 78.42 512.501.480.00 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE - 72 (72) - 512.501.490.00 MISCELLANEOUS 200 310 (110) 155.03 512.501.490.01 INTERPETER FEES 4,000 4,281 (281) 107.03 523.200.510.00 HOME MONITORING - INTERG 10,000 9,470 530 94.70 594.120.640.00 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 9,000 8,391 609 93.24 Total 176,299 118,477 39,960 67.20% 512.510 JUDGE 512.510.410.00 PROFESSIONAL SVC 2,000.00 2,698.82 -698.82 134.94 Total 2,000.00 2,698.82 -698.82 134.94% 512.540 JURY 512.540.490.00 MISC - JURY 2,000.00 383.45 1,616.55 19.17 Total 2,000.00 383.45 1,616.55 19.17% Grand Total 593,035 434,792 140,382 73.32% PASSPORT REVENUE PASSPORT REVENUE FROM 2003-2006YearJan Feb March April MayJuneJulyAugSeptOctNovDecTotal2,0062,8502,7003,0901,7891,8112,1301,9201,8901,610$19,7902,0053,1503,7803,8103,8703,5103,2102,5502,3101,8501,8901,2902,130$33,3502,0046,3605,4305,2504,0803,1802,9103,5703,6002,3102,0702,3703,090$44,2202,0031,9804,6504,2004,3804,8303,5603,3102,8803,1902,7602,0403,480$41,26001,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,000Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec2006200520042003 City of Edmonds Municipal Court—Technical Assistance Report, 2006 1 EDMONDS MUNICIPAL COURT Technical Assistance Report April 2006 INTRODUCTION: Judge Doug Fair was appointed judge of the Edmonds Municipal Court in July of 2005. The court’s prior two judges left the bench as the result of disciplinary actions, one of which involved criminal activity. Upon assuming the bench, Judge Fair contacted AOC and requested an “audit” of Edmonds Municipal Court. Judge Fair did not identify any specific concerns and indicated that he had confidence in the court’s administrator. As the incoming presiding judge, he expressed an interest in gaining a sense of how the court was functioning and whether there were areas in which there could be improvement. SCOPE OF REPORT: Five measures were agreed upon that it was felt would provide a sense of whether the court is on the right track. Three measures are caseload related; filings to dispositions, staff to cases, and collections rate. These measures will be viewed in comparison to other similarly situated municipal courts. AOC also agreed to travel to Edmonds Municipal Court to review workflow and money handling. Judge Fair advised that the court is audited regularly by both the City of Edmonds and by the state auditor. It was decided that AOC would review the last three audits and verify that any noted exceptions have been corrected. Finally, Judge Fair indicated a willingness to allow this review to be used by the Board for Judicial Administration, Best Practices Committee in developing and testing its court audit measures. Gil Austin, Meagan Eliot, and Doug Haake visited Edmonds Municipal Court on April 4th, 2006. We were there for approximately 5 hours and were able to meet with all court personnel individually after being introduced by the Court Administrator, Joan Ferebee. OVERVIEW OF COURT OPERATIONS: The Edmonds Municipal Court is located in a modern building which also houses the police department. The courtroom is also used by the city council. Court hours are clearly and prominently posted. The court conducts a full day of hearings each week and holds mitigation and schedules contested hearings on alternating Thursday evenings. The judge reviews probable cause affidavits and warrant returns daily. The court has a magnetometer which is staffed by contract Mount Lake Terrace Police officers. Prisoner transport into court is accomplished by secure elevator. One officer will accompany up to 5 or 6 offenders. There are 2 officers in the courtroom. City of Edmonds Municipal Court—Technical Assistance Report, 2006 2 There is no duress button in the courtroom. The judge’s chambers, which open into the courtroom, have a key lock. Edmonds Municipal Court does not accept filings from other jurisdictions. Filings have declined for about three years related to police budget cuts and the Redmond v. Moore DWLS 3 ruling out of the Supreme Court. In 2006, the city formed a new traffic unit, which has resulted in increased filings. Edmonds Municipal court has four full-time clerks, and one part-time clerk, a probation officer, an administrator, and one judge. The office is large, with plenty of room for expansion. The work environment is well spaced cubicles in a light and relatively quiet space. The front counter is enclosed, with glass between the clerk and the public; the judge, administrator, and probation officer have enclosed offices just off the main space. Clerks and the judge have direct private access to the court room. Clerks have clearly defined duties, which rotate every other year. Clerks also act as backup for breaks and other absences. The front desk is covered during all court hours. The clerks were able to clearly articulate their duties and explain their part in the workflow. One of the court staff is fluent in Spanish, which assists the court in conducting its business and presents the court as a widely accessible organization. The court receives between 30 and 100 parking, infraction, and criminal citations per day. All citations are entered into JIS on the day received. Depending on the nature of the offense and custody status, files are created and court dates set. One clerk checks jail rosters daily for Snohomish County and City of Lynnwood, sets hearings, orders transport, and notifies attorneys. The clerk prints out offender’s DCH, ADR, and dockets for the judge and attorneys. In custody cases are set in order of priority: no bail offenses, arraignments, pre-trials, and probation reviews. The court has developed policies allowing for mitigation by mail and counter deferrals. Counter mitigations are not provided for. The judge has developed documentation that clearly guides clerk action. Dispositions and notice to DOL are done by the clerk who is responsible for the type of offense (parking, infraction, criminal). The court does not offer DV protection or anti- harassment protection orders. The police department provides a monthly list of citations issued which is checked against cases filed. The court summons 2000 jurors per year for a 30 day term. The court gives 45 days notice of jury service. The judge reviews juror requests to be excused, usually by resetting service to another time. The court holds 2-3 jury trials per year. Money Handling: City of Edmonds Municipal Court—Technical Assistance Report, 2006 3 State audits of Edmonds Municipal Court for that past three years were reviewed. No findings were noted concerning the municipal court. A city audit of cash handling procedures recommended that a second person without ability to sign checks should review bank reconciliations. Changes based on this recommendation have been implemented. The court has a locked drop box. Access is in the court’s front office and is accessible only by court employees. The accounting clerk and front desk clerk are both present when the lockbox is opened. All payments from the lock box are entered into a ledger by the accounting clerk and initialed by both clerks. The front desk clerk enters payments into JIS. Mail is opened by the accounting clerk. Payments are entered into JIS by the front desk clerk. The front office has a key lock cash drawer for payments received during the day. At 3:00, the cash drawer is balanced and money on hand is deposited into the bank by the accounting clerk. Money or credit card payments received after 3:00 are stored in locked money bags and kept in a locked safe. The accounting clerk is responsible for balancing accounts daily and monthly. She handles credit card payments, bail refunds, bank deposits, and remittances to the city. The administrator reconciles bank statements. Collection Rates Courts are required to report collection rates to their city or county for inclusion in financial reports (Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Rules 33 and 34). AOC developed a report to allow courts to generate this information. City of Edmonds was compared to five other courts with similar caseload numbers. Collection rates for all compared courts have declined over a five year period. Edmonds Municipal Court’s collection rate has dropped from a high of 22.75% in 2002 to 13.87% in 2004. The collection rate for all comparison courts dropped over the period 2001 to 2005. Court 1 dropped from 16.90% in 2001 to 10.58% in 2005; comparison court 2 dropped from 24.38% in 2001 to 13.33% in 2005. Five year averages for all compared courts range from 15.41% to 22.96%; Edmond’s five year collections average is 19.36%. City of Edmonds has the lowest average collection rate of the more urban courts in the comparison group (19.36% compared to 19.67% and 20.73%) Dispositions: Consistent with information received from Edmonds Municipal Court, caseload reports indicate that Edmonds Municipal Court filings have declined from approximately 10,000 charges in 2001 to 5,954 in 2005. Of the comparison courts, the decline in Edmonds Municipal Court was the most dramatic. City of Fife Municipal Court filings declined from approximately 8,000 to 5, 422 for the same period; other courts experienced lesser declines or remained roughly even for the period. City of Edmonds Municipal Court—Technical Assistance Report, 2006 4 Edmonds Municipal Court experienced a 5 year filings to dispositions ratio of 1.03, with a high of 1.14 and a low of .98. Comparison courts had 5 year average filing to disposition ratios ranging from 1.02 to 1.09. Staffing Ratio: In 2004, Edmonds Municipal Court had .53 FTE judicial officer(s). The court had a staff of 6.18 FTE for an 11.6 staff to judge ratio. The court’s caseload for 2004 was 5,742 for a case to judge ratio of 10,833.9 and a case to staff ratio of 929.1. Comparison courts ranged from a high of 11,868 cases to judge ratio and a case to staff ratio of 1634.7 to a low of 4687.3 case/judge and 636.14 case/ staff ratio. Staff to judge ratios ranged from 13.92 to 7.26. No readily apparent pattern exists between court size or caseload and actual staffing levels. Recommendations: 1] Arrange for an additional officer to escort prisoners for court appearances. There is only one officer escorting prisoners from the holding facility into the courtroom. An elevator is used for the prisoner escort. American Correctional Association standards call for two officers to be in an elevator when prisoners are being escorted. 2] Install an electronic card reader for access for the judge and court staff to exit courtroom. There is no prompt means for the judge and court staff to leave the courtroom on a routine and especially emergency basis. Although, this is a somewhat expensive item it is regarded as routine. 3] Install a duress alarm on the portion of the hearing desk used by the judge as a bench. Duress alarms are expected items of security equipment for every courtroom setting. The alarm should be connected to the police dispatch center so an immediate response could be made if needed. 4] Investigate creative collection techniques. A number of courts report success with collection amnesties and other approaches to increasing collection rates. This will probably involve cooperation from the court’s collection agency. A joint effort with other courts in close proximity to Edmonds might make an effort easier and more effective. Final Observations In all observed aspects of court administration the Edmonds Municipal Court is well organized, managed and appropriately staffed. Especially exemplary is the care that has been taken in handling funds, which is often a problematic area for courts since funds come into the care of courts in such a multitude of means. City of Edmonds Municipal Court—Technical Assistance Report, 2006 5 Judge Fair, Court Administrator Ferebee and the court staff are to be complimented for a well organized operation that conducts business in an appropriately cordial manner to the public and to one another. AM-679 5. Old Milltown Findings of Fact Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Duane Bowman, Development Services Time:15 Minutes Department:Development Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Approval of Findings of Fact regarding the Closed Record Review held on 10/17/06 - Appeal by Elisabeth Larman on the Architectural Design Board approval of the refurbishment of Old Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South. Previous Council Action The City Council conducted a closed record review on October 17, 2006 on the appeal of Elisabeth Larman on the Architectural Design Board (ADB) approval of the refurbishment of Old Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South. The Council voted to remand the matter back to the ADB for clarification of its findings. Narrative Attached are draft Findings of Fact prepared by the City Attorney for the City Council decision regarding the appeal on the ADB decision on the refurbishment of the Old Milltown building at 201 5th Avenue South. The City Council will need to establish a date for the return of the ADB findings. Recommendation Adopt the Proposed Findings of Fact. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - 101706 City Council Minutes Link: Exhibit 2 - City Attorney Memo Link: Exhibit 3 - Draft Findings Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:49 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 03:53 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:56 PM APRV Form Started By: Duane Bowman Started On: 11/02/2006 03:24 PM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 7. CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OF AN APPEAL BY ELISABETH LARMAN ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD APPROVAL OF THE REFURBISHMENT OF OLD MILLTOWN, LOCATED AT 201 5TH AVENUE SOUTH. (FILE NO. APL-20060003 AND PLN-20060094) Closed Record Review – Refurbishment of Old Milltown Mayor Haakenson advised a petition was received regarding the above referenced Closed Record Review that was not part of the record and therefore could not be considered by the Council. The petition would be distributed to the Council following the conclusion of the matter. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained following Regulatory Reform, cities were limited in land use reviews to two hearings – one on the record and one closed record hearing. In this case the open record hearing was held before the Architectural Design Board (ADB) and the Council would conduct a Closed Record Review. The Closed Record Review was limited to the appellant and parties of record who spoke at the ADB. All argument must be based on the ADB record and no new information can be provided. Mayor Haakenson advised the four parties of record are Bob Gregg, Ralph Allen, Betty Larman and Roger Hertrich. In accordance with the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, Mayor Haakenson asked Councilmembers if they had had any conflicts or exparte communication to disclose. Councilmember Orvis advised Councilmember Wambolt, Councilmember Plunkett and he attended an ACE meeting last Thursday. The discussion of Old Milltown was on the agenda but was moved to the end of the agenda to allow the Councilmembers to leave the meeting before the discussion occurred. Councilmember Plunkett advised he attended the ACE meeting but left before Old Milltown was discussed. He advised when there was some uncertainty regarding whether this would become a quasi judicial matter, Ms. Larman emailed him a question and he replied that the matter had just become quasi judicial and he could no longer discuss it, indicating although it was quasi judicial, the issue would be whether the applicant met the existing design guidelines. They had no further communication. Councilmember Wambolt advised he attended an ADB meeting where this issue arose. On the advice of Mr. Snyder he did not speak with anyone in attendance. Council President Dawson explained when it was unknown whether this would come before the Council, a number of people expressed concern about the building to her. Last night she attended an event where a gentleman relayed a question from a friend that the building would have two additional stories added. She advised him it would not but said she was unable to discuss it further because it was on tonight’s agenda. She summarized there had been some general “chatter” expressing concern with the refurbishment of Old Milltown but she did not recall any specifics. Mayor Haakenson asked whether the four Councilmembers felt they had the ability to hear this matter in a fair and impartial manner. Council President Dawson and Councilmembers Wambolt, Orvis and Plunkett indicated they did. Mayor Haakenson asked if there were any challenges from the parties of record to the participation of these four Councilmembers. Roger Hertrich advised he did not challenge the participation of the four Councilmembers but questioned the relationship between Councilmember Moore and Mr. Gregg and invited her to explain. Councilmember Moore responded she could handle the matter in a fair and impartial manner. Mr. Snyder asked Councilmember Moore whether she had any existing financial relationship with Mr. Gregg. Councilmember Moore answered she did not. Mr. Snyder asked whether she had any financial interest in this project. Councilmember Moore responded no. Mayor Haakenson advised all Councilmembers were approved to participate in the Closed Record Review. He established the time limits: 20 minutes for Ms. Larman with the opportunity to save time for rebuttal, the applicant (Mr. Gregg and Mr. Allen) would share 20 minutes, and 3 minutes for Mr. Hertrich. He noted the burden of proof was on the appellant, thus the reason she was allowed rebuttal. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether there had been adequate public hearing on the measurement of the 4,000 square feet. Mr. Snyder suggested that be addressed at the conclusion of the presentations to enable him to cite the record. He cautioned about an appearance of unfairness if in questioning or comments a Councilmember appeared to have prejudged an issue. Senior Planner Steve Bullock advised on September 6 the ADB held a public hearing in regard to the refurbishment of the Old Milltown. Notice of the public hearing via advertising the ADB’s agenda was provided the same as any project that did not require SEPA review. He noted if a project required SEPA review, there were additional noticing requirements such as posting the site and mailed notice to adjacent property owners. In either case, the project must adhere to the same criteria and a public hearing must be held before the ADB. After hearing testimony from the public and applicant at their September 6 hearing, the ADB found the proposed refurbishment consistent with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 10.20 and also the Comprehensive Plan. He referred to pages 10 and 11 of the packet, the portion of the ADB minutes that contained their motion for approval which was approved with a 4-1 vote. He reiterated the appellant had the burden of proof to show the applicant did not comply with the criteria. Councilmember Wambolt inquired about possible action the Council could take – affirm or overturn the ADB’s decision or remand to the Planning Board. Mr. Bullock explained if the Council felt the ADB did not address elements of the approval criteria, it could be remanded with the request that certain items be addressed. He commented a remand could result in a reaffirmation of the Planning Board’s original decision with findings to support those criteria or overturning their original decision. Councilmember Plunkett referred to page 32 of the packet that stated the design of new or renovated buildings in the downtown area should be sensitive to the presence of historic buildings. He asked whether the code contained a definition of historic and whether it referred to historically recognized landmarks or the more common meaning of historic such as character, etc. Mr. Bullock answered this did not refer specifically to historic registered buildings, only the general nature and character of downtown. Councilmember Plunkett asked about the definition of “sensitive,” assuming it was the common definition of “to be affected by.” Mr. Bullock agreed. Mayor Haakenson reiterated only the four parties of record would be allowed to speak. If the public wanted to comment, Mr. Snyder clarified any general discussion by members of the public who are not parties of record should not occur until after the Council adopted written Findings of Fact. Appellant Elisabeth Larman asked to retain 5 minutes for rebuttal. City Clerk Sandy Chase distributed a handout to the Council and Mr. Gregg that was prepared by Ms. Larman . Ms. Chase noted that Mr. Bullock had reviewed the handout and determined all the information was contained in the record. Ms. Larman explained she was appealing the Old Milltown renovation and minor expansion plan as it was not consistent with the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Design Guidelines 20.10.070 criteria and the Urban Design guidelines as follows: • Pedestrian Oriented Design – takes away pedestrian gathering places • Massing – fills every square inch of the space • Modulation of walls and roof lines – long unaccented walls and roof lines • Materials for the era – unspecified metals, fiberglass and unspecified tiles instead of brick • Historic character and respect for its surroundings – no respect for history or neighboring structures She enumerated other discrepancies and questions as follows: • Parking spaces – there is at least one less parking space than required by the guidelines • Lack of clarity for the planned use of the northwest corner of the building – what will be the use of that space in that part of the building? • Partial development of a larger property – only the north portion of the Old Milltown property is shown in this proposal. Why is the Old Milltown complex allowed to be presented with no indication of plans for the entire complex? She displayed a drawing of Old Milltown as it currently exists. She provided the following citations from Section 4 of the Urban Design Guidelines of the Downtown Activity Center: • Historic Resources: “building should be sensitive to the presence of historic buildings” • Downtown Character: “reinforce historic character and pedestrian orientation” • Shapes and Forms: “buildings should avoid large massive roof and modulation on both street frontages.” • Materials: “should complement what is used in the vicinity.” • Size, height, bulk and massing: “large building masses should be subdivided vertically and/or horizontally…” • Streetscape: “Encourage the placement of street furniture and awnings over the public right-of-way.” • Rehabilitation and Continuing Use: “Rehab of existing buildings is encouraged.” With regard to historic resources, she referred to Urban Design Guideline page 23 (1)(2), recalling the slide in Mr. Allen’s presentation entitled “A Sense of History” that was blank. She recalled he told ADB members that that information would be filled later and he mentioned adding a bronze plaque at a later date. She noted the addition of a bronze plaque did not give a building a sense of history, what gave a building a sense of history was respecting the shapes, size, volume, materials, decorative elements, colors and styles of a certain period. While she applauded exposing the original concrete beam construction, the new building, because of its exaggerated linear shape, use of modern materials that were not in existence in the 1900s and its massive building design did not complement or fit in well with the surrounding older, smaller structures. With regard to shapes and forms, she displayed a comparison of the existing and proposed Old Milltown north, west and south rooflines. She referred to Urban Design Guidelines page 25 (C & D) which state, “however the building forms are employed; buildings should avoid long unbroken roof and wall lines. Where buildings are located on corner lots, the shape and form of the building should accent the corner. Buildings on corner lot must be designed to provide visual interest and modulation on both street frontages.” She referred to a statement in the ADB staff report, “some elements of the current version of the building that people identify with are proposed to be removed, the second story bays at the corner of 5th and Dayton, a portion of the building that did not have a second story is proposed to be filled in. The hip roof that covers a good portion of the building will be removed.” She summarized the developer’s plan as reported by staff was not contested by either the planning department or the ADB. With regard to materials, she referred to Urban Design Guidelines page 24, item 2B, pointing out the developer failed to bring samples of any of the materials and the ADB failed to ask for them. For example they did not provide samples of the unspecified steel channel cornice, metal awnings over entrances, fiberglass awnings, tiles, or color scheme and color charts. She displayed several elevation drawings identifying the location of these materials. She found this extremely unusual in a project’s architectural presentation. She recalled during rebuttal of her statement regarding the overuse of stucco, Mr. Gregg stated that he did not like stucco, did not use it himself and there was no stucco on the building (page 10 of the ADB minutes). She noted there was extensive use of stucco on the building. With regard to size, height, bulk and massing, Ms. Larman explained on the 5th Avenue side, the space between the existing 2-story pavilions that are framing the building both at the corner of Dayton and at the courtyard are going to be filled with a 2,367 square foot addition that would come to within 16 inches of the façade edge on 5th Avenue. The original streetscape would be replaced with a massive frontage on both 5th and Dayton. She opined that 16 inches was not enough of a setback for a visual break in the massing of the 5th Avenue façade. On the Dayton side, the building extended out to the sidewalk, completely eliminating any modulation or variety. The massing of the new building went against the guidelines and creates 2-story full size walls on all sides of the building, a fact the ADB did not question. She referred to the statement on page 2 of the ADB staff report that indicated there was no change in site organization, explaining an examination of the floor plans revealed the site organization had been significantly changed since almost all the setbacks and pedestrian gathering spaces have been eliminated in the new building’s plan. This fact was not questioned by the ADB members. With regard to rehabilitation and continuing use, Ms. Larman noted in various documents, the project was referred to as a renovation or refurbishment; however, Mr. Bullock has stated the proposal is to gut the building entirely and refurbish it (reference draft ADB minutes page 6). Other than the poured concrete beams, nothing will remain of the original building which she asserted did not represent a refurbishment. She noted the dictionary definition of refurbishment was “to brighten up.” She referred to a floor plan for the second floor (slide 7b), identifying a 1500 square foot space and questioning whether this was added space. The project would be considered a major project and require three additional parking stalls if that was usable space. She noted the total declared added square footage was 3,556 square feet. She pointed out the 1500 square foot area was not well enough described in the cross section plan provided by the developer. She quoted from the ADB staff report, “However, all new buildings or additions to old buildings will need to provide 1 parking stall for every 500 square feet of new commercial area over and above what parking they have on site. In this case, the applicant will have to show as part of their building permit that they are providing an additional 7 parking stalls over what is already provided on site.” She noted the submitted floor plans only contained 6 parking stalls. This fact was not questioned by the ADB members. Ms. Larman summarized she had clearly shown this new building went against many of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and Urban Design Guidelines. The building did not conform to the guidelines for pedestrian oriented design as it takes away pedestrian gathering places (ECP Land Use 1, Site Design Building Setbacks page 38), massing – it fills every square inch of the space (ECP Land Use, Building Height, page 40), modulation of walls and roof lines – long monotonous and unaccented walls and rooflines (ECP page 41), materials for the era – unspecified metals, fiberglass and tiles instead of brick (ECP page 39 and 42), and historic character and respect for its surroundings – no respect for history nor neighboring structures (Urban Design Guidelines page 23). She invited the Council to find the answers to the questions regarding the square footage of added usable space as well as the missing seventh parking space. She asserted Mr. Gregg appeared to be phasing the development of Old Milltown and was showing only the north portion of his property in this proposal. She questioned why Old Milltown would be allowed to be presented as a minor project with indication of plans for future development. She asked the City Council to return the plans for Old Milltown to the City planners for correction and adherence to the guidelines by Mr. Gregg before being presented again to the ADB for their approval. She asked that the City Council request the City planners ask Mr. Gregg to produce a cross section of the northeast corner of the building on Dayton that clearly illustrated the use of the building at the façade. She asked that the ADB request Mr. Gregg produce sample boards of all finishing materials for the building and the needed color schemes and charts and that they reflect the history and age of the building. She requested the Council approve this appeal of the ADB Decision – Old Milltown Refurbishment and send this project back to the ADB, requiring that they apply their own rules to every project equally. Councilmember Plunkett asked Ms. Larman to identify the pedestrian gathering spaces that were being eliminated and asked whether there would be less sidewalk space. Ms. Larman referred to drawing 7a, a floor plan of the first floor, pointing out on Dayton, the building was recessed 8 feet from the sidewalk. She identified “nooks and crannies” on the Dayton elevation which the applicant’s proposal eliminated and along 5th Avenue where the building would be a solid wall at the sidewalk. Councilmember Plunkett referred to Ms. Larman’s letter which asserted the project was over 5,000 square feet. She state it would be over 5,000 square feet if the 1500 square foot area on the second floor was included. That space was not declared as added space. She recalled Mr. Bullock stated Mr. Gregg planned to install a façade but that area would be empty space. She found that highly unusual, questioning the retail space on the first floor having a 2½ story ceiling. Councilmember Plunkett suggested Mr. Gregg testify whether there would be a second floor in that location. Mr. Snyder cautioned those assurances could not be made at this level as no new information could be added to the record. Councilmember Plunkett asked in what way the proposal was not sensitive to the presence of historic buildings. Ms. Larman answered materials and size of the building in comparison to other buildings in the area particularly on Dayton. Councilmember Plunkett asked if the building materials did not replicate the historic character. Ms. Larman commented the proposed building did not fit well with the buildings in the vicinity. Applicant Bob Gregg displayed a picture of the existing Old Milltown and the proposed refurbishment. With regard to color, he pointed out there was no color pallet in the code that identified permitted colors other than a statement that garish colors should try to be avoided. The proposed materials replicated the historic nature of the building better than the current status of the building. He commented Old Milltown was a 100-year old building that did not meet any of the City’s existing codes or the new Design Guidelines regarding storefronts along the street. The building was a poured-in-place garage that was used as an automotive shop, a bus barn and other industrial uses; a 1978 remodel added pseudo-Victorian elements. He commented the building was just old and weird enough to be charming. He recalled one ADB member asked why they were not demolishing the building and his response was that few poured-in-place concrete buildings remained where the imprint of the rough-sawn boards was visible in the concrete and where the concrete was bowed as a result of the boards bowing. With regard to the building materials, he pointed out thin, fake brick was added in the late 1970s. He proposed the use of a natural sandstone material that was used a great deal in the 1900s. He pointed out the mechanical equipment would be screened and 90% of the building would be what currently exists. He pointed out this would be a 2-story, 25-foot building. The area on the second floor was as shown on the drawing – a 2-story atrium. He acknowledged it was not where he would plan to have a 2-story atrium in a new building but that was the nature of a renovation. With regard to his comment about stucco, he clarified his response was to a question whether this would be a stucco box. To his knowledge the building did not have any stucco as they were preserving the existing concrete. However, the new walls which were less than 10-30% of the linear area would have an application to match the existing concrete which the architect referred to as stucco. Ralph Allen displayed a drawing of the building from above, explaining they were infilling the existing well at the second story level and moving it to within 16 inches of the existing front of the building. He displayed a drawing of the existing building and the new building, explaining they planned varied modulation with a lightly arched opening to add variety and relief to the building. The intent was to retain the emphasis on the corners. He referred to the saddle approach with the building high on the corners and relief through the middle. He identified an inset deck/exposed veranda that was accessible to the commercial space on the second floor, commenting that approach was sensitive to the existing massing of the building. He identified variation in the cap detail treatment and the solid awning over the corner building elements to further enhance the presence at the corner. The primary retail entry at the corner was maintained and a new entry developed on 5th. He pointed out a series of translucent awnings along 5th which the ADB requested be deepened to provide more effective rain cover. Mr. Allen displayed a view from Dayton, explaining the driving force behind the extension along Dayton was to get enough setback to provide required parking inside the building. He identified the entry into Dayton Avenue lobby to reach the second floor, the entry to the garage and the entry to the retail space. He identified a 5-6 foot recessed space, commenting that restored some of the exterior pedestrian space on Dayton. He identified the high bay space on Dayton. He pointed out the existing corner entry on 5th & Dayton was retained along with a major awning. He identified the translucent awnings and window box planters on 5th that provided pedestrian scale. He also identified the seven locations for a series of historic plaques that would describe the history of the building and the region. He displayed a rendering of the view of the corner at 5th & Dayton, explaining the multi-colored variegated sandstone would be similar to the original concrete material. He noted the original concrete was cast using sand from the beach. Mayor Haakenson asked Mr. Allen to identify the 1500 square feet area proposed to be an atrium. Mr. Allen referred to the drawing of the second story floor plan, identifying the section of floor that would not be built. The second floor shown in the cross section was cut through the southeast corner of the property, a high bay sawtooth trussed space. He advised this was where the existing antique mall space was located and there were stairs down to Starfeathers. That existing 2-story space would be retained. Councilmember Orvis referred to the alley on the north side of the building, commenting that the section of the building to the east was currently one story and now would be two stories. He asked what one story portions would become two stories. Mr. Allen answered the front would still be a single story but would be a high bay single story. Councilmember Orvis referred to page 28 of the packet, inquiring about the office lease space on the second floor. Mr. Allen answered that was a different cross section; in that area there would be floor space. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 30 MINTUES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the appellant’s illustration that there was a reduction in the pedestrian space. He asked if the applicant agreed the pedestrian spaces on Dayton and 5th would be eliminated by the proposed design. Mr. Allen explained the space on 5th was filled in with retail space and the retail entry became a display window. He identified spaces on Dayton that were left open, an entry portico into the entry space. Other than those areas, he agreed there had been a reduction in pedestrian space. Councilmember Plunkett commented there appeared to be a contradiction between whether the existing structure was historic. He recalled Mr. Gregg’s comment that it was not historic compared to Mr. Allen’s comment that this was a great, historic building. Mr. Gregg pointed out the property was not on any local, state or federal historic registry, therefore, it was not a historic registered landmark. He acknowledged it was an old building, built in 1910. With regard to massing and Ms. Larman’s assertion that the proposed design filled in every square inch of space, Councilmember Plunkett asked what massing criteria must be met. Mr. Gregg answered the building was in the property-line-to-property line zone. He referred to the criteria in 20.10.070 which he noted were very subjective. For example, long massive unbroken or monotonous buildings shall be avoided in order to comply with the purposes of this chapter to allow light and air to occupants of the development, to provide space for landscaping and recreational facilities. The proposed design was not unbroken and was not monotonous. He opined the building would be less monotonous than it was now when the renovation was complete. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether that applied to new construction as well as renovations. Mr. Snyder commented regardless of whether a project was large or small, renovated or new, all projects must meet the same criteria. Councilmember Orvis referred to the question regarding the number of stalls and that the approximately 3600 square feet of new area would require seven parking stalls. He asked where the seventh stall would be placed. Mr. Gregg was not certain that was an ADB issue, but it could be addressed by either reducing the square footage, adding a parking space or acquiring additional parking from the church. He advised if another parking stall was required, it would be provided as the project could not obtain an occupancy permit until adequate parking was provided. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the rendering of the corner and the criteria to be sensitive to surrounding historic structures. He acknowledged the entry was sensitive to what existed but the design guidelines require it be sensitive to the presence of surrounding historic buildings. He asked how the entry was affected by the outside influences of surrounding historic buildings. Mr. Gregg asked what surrounding historic structures Councilmember Plunkett was referring to. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the historic character of buildings from Dayton north toward the fountain. Mr. Gregg asked if he was referring to the Red Twig or the tavern. Mr. Gregg disagreed he was being asked to be sensitive to other historic structures, advising the proposed design was sensitive to the Beeson building. He summarized they complied with the spirit and letter of that requirement. Mr. Snyder referred to Ms. Larman’s allegation that material samples were not provided. Mr. Gregg acknowledged neither a color board nor a material board was provided. As they were not part of the record, they did not provide that information tonight. Parties of Record Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented this was referred to as a remodel, refurbishment, renovation and a phased job, pointing out the building was actually being gutted out and only a couple walls/structures retained, creating a new building inside. He noted the new structures were built strong enough to support a third floor. He referred to Figure A30, pointing out there were two openings provided on the Dayton Street side, one for automobiles and another for a service entrance. He suggested that would violate the parking standards as site design standards require curb cuts to be minimized. He suggested those two openings be combined into one, eliminating one curb cut. Mr. Hertrich referred to the drawing that identified the building materials, identifying two doorways, one for parking and the other for service and an area behind that was closed off. He commented the square footage in that area increased the project to over 4,000 square feet in addition to the contested northeast corner. He referred to the drawing of the northeast corner which the applicant assured would be a 2-story atrium, finding it very unusual to have a 2-story space over the parking and a first floor commercial space. He noted this was the reason a cross section was requested. With regard to the applicant’s assertion that the building was expanded to the street to provide parking, he pointed out the unexcavated area that was part of the north structure could provide additional parking. He viewed the proposed design as an attempt to keep the project as a minor project to eliminate the need for an additional three parking spaces. He commented the additional six parking spaces gave Old Milltown a total of 30 parking spaces; however, most of the spaces were in the south section. He questioned what guarantee the City had that the parking spaces in the south section would be retained when that section was renovated. He suggested a development agreement that identified open space, parking, etc. Mr. Hertrich then played an audio recording of the ADB’s motion, “I’ll make a motion that the design Board approve ADB2006094 with the following conditions: number 1, number 2 and the awnings along 5th Avenue South should be designed to provide sufficient protection for pedestrians and extend 5-6 feet over the sidewalk at the architect’s discretion.” The motion was seconded and carried with one member opposed. Mr. Hertrich noted the motion did not reference the Comprehensive Plan. For Councilmember Plunkett, Mr. Hertrich pointed out the recording of the ADB’s motion did not state that the Board found the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; however, the motion printed in the minutes did. He asserted the ADB’s motion was not proper and negated the motion. Mr. Snyder answered the matter was on appeal to the Council and it was up to the Council to determine whether the criteria were met. He agreed it was preferable for boards to make a detailed motion that reflected their findings and conclusions. He explained that could be done by incorporating the staff report by reference which the ADB’s motion did not appear to do. He advised that could be corrected at this level or the Council could remand the matter back to the ADB. Rebuttal Ms. Larman displayed slide 7b, the second floor drawing, commenting an atrium was usually at the center of a building, a luxurious feature. She found it difficult to believe there was an atrium over a ramp into the parking and over a small retail space. She was not convinced by Mr. Gregg’s or Mr. Allen’s presentations that the proposal met the ADB’s guidelines. She reiterated the proposal eliminated pedestrian spaces and eliminated human scale and sky by adding mass to a building. She acknowledged this was not a historic building, and was originally a very ugly box. She commented the design was now back to a box and although it was not a bad design, it belonged in a strip mall or downtown Bellevue and did not belong in the historic center of Edmonds. She concluded the building could be refurbished to respect the open spaces, setbacks and open itself to the public. Instead it would be a great big box that would dominate the entire area. She asked the Council to approve the appeal of the ADB Decision for the Old Milltown refurbishment for all the reasons she mentioned in her earlier summary. Council President Dawson asked Ms. Larman to clarify her comment that this was not historic and whether she was referring to the proposal or the existing building. Ms. Larman answered Old Milltown was not on the historic register and the Council had not defined a historic district in Edmonds. She commented it was somewhat the Council’s fault as they had made it unclear. She noted the 1973 Old Milltown was historic as that was what most people remembered. In response to Mr. Hertrich’s comments about the ADB’s motion, Mr. Bullock referred to the recommended motion on page 15 of the packet in the staff report to the ADB. He noted Board Member Kendall referred to Item 1 and 2; beneath Items 1 and 2 and a third paragraph regarding the awning, there was a paragraph that addressed the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted City policies. He recalled Board Member Kendall amended her motion at his prompting to include reference to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning code. Mr. Snyder cautioned the Council not to make findings that could be perceived as “backdooring” historic preservation requirements when the City’s historic preservation registration was an entirely voluntary process. The ADB guidelines refer to surrounding structures but there was nothing in the guidelines that required preservation of a building; the developer could file for a demolition permit at their discretion. He recommended the Council read this section and the use of historic in conjunction with the historic preservation provisions. Councilmember Plunkett asked where in the packet the standards were that related to pedestrian oriented design. Mr. Bullock stated the pedestrian oriented design was referred to in a number of places. The ADB’s and staff’s take in reviewing the project was the orientation of the windows and doors to the stores were to the sidewalk and were designed to encourage interaction between the public sidewalk and the retail uses in the building which they viewed as pedestrian oriented. Councilmember Plunkett observed there was not a more definitive standard with regard to pedestrian orientation. Mr. Bullock agreed. Councilmember Plunkett commented if the Council remanded to the ADB, the project would continue to be worked on. If the Council rejected the appeal, the applicant could reapply. Mr. Bullock agreed. He requested if the Council was considering remanding that they identify what issues they wanted addressed. Mr. Snyder reminded because this was an appeal, the Council was limited to the issues on appeal in a remand. His understood Ms. Larman was asking the Council to remand to address the issues she raised. Councilmember Moore asked staff to address the issue of parking spaces. Mr. Bullock pointed out one of staff’s recommended conditions was that the applicant demonstrate with their building permit how they would comply with the parking regulations. That condition was adopted as part of the ADB’s motion. Because the square footage of a building could vary slightly between design approval and building permit submittal, staff often deferred the final determination on parking for review with the building permit. He advised the applicant could provide parking via onsite stalls or through lease agreements with other properties with available parking. Council President Dawson commented the record indicated Ms. Larman’s testimony before the ADB was asking the ADB to reject the project. She did not read the appeal as a request for a remand but rather that the Council find that it did not conform to the guidelines and therefore would need to be changed and resubmitted to the ADB. Mr. Snyder agreed she raised both issues but recalled Ms. Larman requested a remand several times during her testimony tonight. Council President Dawson concluded the Council was not restricted to only a remand; the Council could state they respectfully disagreed with the ADB’s findings and reverse their decision. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO REJECT THE APPEAL ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT DID NOT MEET THE BURDEN OF PROOF. Councilmember Moore explained the Council could not make a decision based on their own taste, vision of the City or preferences. She did not find Ms. Larman met the challenge of proving the proposal did not meet the guidelines. There was no proof the square footage increased the level of the project. With regard to pedestrian oriented design, she agreed with staff that it was not about the number of square feet of concrete where one could put their feet, pedestrian orientation was what occurred within the 12-foot area at the street. She noted this project included a lot of large windows which could be viewed as pedestrian oriented as well as window boxes. With regard to massing, she acknowledged the proposal filled every inch of space but that was allowed under the zoning. Modulation of walls and roof lines, she found the building to be accented in both walls and roof. With regard to materials for the era, she noted the applicant had preserved and was replicating the main material of the era and taking off the material that was added in subsequent remodeling. With regard to the historic character and respect for surroundings and Ms. Larman’s assertion there was no respect for historic character or respect for neighboring structures, Councilmember Moore commented by preserving, honoring and replicating the large, historic part of the building, the design showed great respect for the surroundings. She noted the surrounding buildings included a brown stucco very modern Windermere building, an empty fenced lot, and the Red Twig Restaurant that had been completed gutted and was now a very modern, beautiful space. Councilmember Marin referred to the list of issues in Ms. Larman’s appeal, finding they were all satisfied by the proposal. He indicated he would support the motion. Councilmember Wambolt indicated he would not support the motion. He pointed out the ADB record was not one of their finest efforts; virtually all they discussed was the awnings. Several of the regular members were absent and the only member of the Board who spoke about anything other than awnings was Rob Michel, the others only spoke about the awnings. With regard to building materials, the ADB had no idea what building materials would be used. He referred to Mr. Gregg’s comment that there was no stucco on the building and although there was evidence that there would be stucco on every side of the building, none of the Board Members challenged that statement. He preferred to remand to the ADB. Councilmember Plunkett commented the appellant did not prove that the mysterious 1500 square feet existed. With regard to sensitivity to historic surroundings, Mr. Gregg’s comments and the rendering of the building convinced him the proposal was sensitive to historic surroundings. Although he was impressed by Councilmember Moore’s definition of pedestrian oriented space, he could not ignore that there was a reduction in pedestrian space. He acknowledged the zone allowed development lot-line-to-lot line but the issue under consideration was the design guidelines not the development code. The applicant acknowledged the building did not meet the urban design guidelines, page 25 C & D - buildings should avoid long unbroken roofs and wall lines. He found the appellant proved the proposal did not meet the standards with regard to pedestrian oriented space and massing. Council President Dawson agreed with Councilmember Plunkett’s comments about avoiding unbroken roofs and wall lines and the pedestrian orientation of the site. When considering conformance with surrounding buildings and the historic character of downtown, she pointed out a new building on the site would not need to comply with the historic nature of the existing building. A refurbishment needed to consider the existing character of the building because that was what made this a minor project, that it was only a refurbishment of the existing building. She noted if the building were demolished and a new building constructed, it would be a major project. Therefore the project must consider not only the surrounding buildings but the existing building being refurbished. Council President Dawson commented Mr. Snyder’s comment with regard to historic preservation contradicted an earlier statement by Mr. Bullock that historic in this ordinance did not mean historic in the context of the historic preservation ordinance but rather the general nature and character of downtown. She pointed out this ordinance was in place prior to the historic preservation ordinance and did not refer to the historic preservation ordinance nor was it intended to incorporate the historic preservation ordinance. She concluded historic meant something different than being on the historic registry. She agreed with staff that it referred to the general nature and character of downtown. This building was a large part of the character of downtown and although it may be a nice building, it dramatically altered the general nature and character of downtown. She indicated her plans to vote against the motion. Councilmember Olson questioned what the Council wanted done if the project were remanded to the ADB. She found the proposal met the code. Councilmember Marin expressed concern with the concept of a remand. He used the example of the restoration of the USS Constitution and the difficulty determining to what period to restore the ship. He noted this building spent its first 60 years looking like a warehouse, a bus barn, and a poured-in-place concrete structure versus the “cutesy” façade constructed in the 1970s which represented only a third of the building’s life. Councilmember Moore recalled when the Council passed the height limit in the BC zone, she believed redevelopment in downtown would be impossible. This proposal is a 25-foot, 2-story building that currently did not meet any of the City’s codes and needed to be brought up to code. There was a property owner who was willing to do this under the current restrictions and the ADB found their proposal met all the City’s standards. She agreed the allegation regarding additional square footage had not been proven by the appellant. She appreciated Council President Dawson’s comments that this was an historic building in terms of the City’s character. She appreciated it was an important structure for the City and that many people think of it as historic even though it has been remodeled several times in recent history. She pointed out the proposed project would preserve the historic part of the building and she preferred the design the ADB approved versus restoring it to the old bus barn look. She concluded the appellant did not prove the issues she raised on appeal. UPON ROLL CALL THE MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE, MARIN AND OLSON IN FAVOR; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS, PLUNKETT AND WAMBOLT OPPOSED. COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE ADB AND DENY APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. Council President Dawson found a lack of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as stated in her earlier comments. Councilmember Wambolt asked the consequence of this action. Mr. Snyder advised the applicant could appeal to Superior Court via a Land Use Petition Act or resubmit their application. Councilmember Wambolt preferred to remand the project back to the ADB to have the Board conduct the due diligence they were responsible for doing. He referred to the written record, asserting that in this instance the ADB did not review the criteria. By contrast, he had attended a number of ADB meetings where they reviewed projects in detail. Councilmember Plunkett acknowledged this was an important building and the redevelopment was important to the community. He hoped the developer would resubmit the project, refining the issues that the Council had identified. He looked forward to someone refurbishing the building. UPON ROLL CALL MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS AND PLUNKETT IN FAVOR; AND COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE, MARIN, OLSON AND WAMBOLT OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO REMAND THE PROJECT BACK TO THE ADB FOR A MORE INTENSIVE REVIEW. Councilmember Wambolt preferred to remand versus appeal to the Superior Court, anticipating the issues could be resolved with a closer look at the project. Mayor Haakenson asked the Council to specify what they wanted the ADB to look at. Mr. Snyder commented one issue that was undisputed was that no material samples were provided to the ADB. He suggested on remand the materials be provided for consideration by the ADB in building design criteria A1, regarding the building exterior and A2, regarding color and the criteria regarding surrounding historic structures. Council President Dawson asked whether the Council could remand to the ADB with the caveat they hold another public hearing. Mr. Snyder advised if new information was provided, there would need to be a new evidentiary public hearing. Council President Dawson expressed her support for the motion as long as there would be another public hearing. Councilmember Wambolt commented his primary concern was the materials. He also supported the ADB holding another public hearing. Council President Dawson requested the ADB consider her earlier comments regarding pedestrian friendliness of the site, the unbroken roof and wall lines and historic surroundings. Councilmember Orvis commented the ADB needed to find that the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Marin hoped via another public hearing, citizens could quantify specifically what they wanted so that ultimately a compromise could be reached similar to the MPOR zone. Councilmember Plunkett commented pedestrian orientation and gathering spaces were more than just the windows and the building. The applicant could not expect to eliminate pedestrian orientation and gathering spaces and still meet that criteria. The applicant admitted the building did not meet the criteria associated with avoiding long unbroken roof and wall lines. Councilmember Olson asked what pedestrian gathering spaces were eliminated. Councilmember Plunkett answered his point was not that the literal space had to be retained but the reduction in open space/gathering space failed to meet the pedestrian oriented standard. Mr. Snyder pointed out there was no criteria that required pedestrian space be retained. He suggested the ADB demonstrate how the proposal related to pedestrian orientation under the guidelines. Councilmember Moore explained the issues for the ADB to consider on remand were the product samples and how the proposal meets pedestrian oriented design and historic character. Mr. Snyder advised he would develop written Findings of Fact and Conclusions that incorporated the Council’s comments. The Findings and Conclusions would be presented to the Council for review on a future agenda. At that time the Council could revise the Findings as appropriate. He advised the Council could not talk about the issue until the Findings were adopted. Mayor Haakenson asked if the ADB’s decision on remand was appealable to the Council. Mr. Snyder answered yes. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. {WSS645228.DOC;1/00006.900000/} A MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS NETWORK WITH INDEPENDENT MEMBER LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2100 • Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • 206.447.7000 • Fax: 206.447.0215 • Web: www.omwlaw.com MEMORANDUM DATE: November 2, 2006 TO: Edmonds City Council City of Edmonds FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorney RE: Old Milltown Findings Enclosed for your review and use is a proposed remand decision regarding the appeal of Elizabeth Larman regarding the Old Milltown project. Please note that the remand is for continued deliberation and clarification by the Board and not for a full open public hearing. As the findings indicate, my research found that the Regulatory Reform Act prohibits any attempt to have a further or new hearing before either the ADB or the City Council. Both permitted public hearings, the full open public hearing and the closed record hearing, have been held. I apologize for any confusion my comments at the Council meeting may have created. My comments regarding the ability of the City Council to remand for a full hearing were in error. As always, when I provide advice at the Council meeting, if I am not absolutely sure of the answer, I research it and when necessary correct that error as soon as possible. WSS:gjz BEFORE THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL In Re the Appeal of ) File No. APL-2006-0003 ) PLN-2006-0094 ELIZABETH LARMAN ) ) I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. This matter came on before the Edmonds City Council for closed record review on October 17, 2006. The Appellant, Elizabeth Larman, appealed from a decision of the Architectural Design Board (“ADB”) approving an application for a remodel of a commercial building known as Old Milltown as a minor project. The subject property is located at 201 Fifth Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. B. Mrs. Larman’s appeal was presented in an appeal letter dated September 20, 2006, attached as Exhibit 1 to the Council packet. Mrs. Larman states four grounds for her appeal: 1. The square footage of the project is over 5,000 square feet and therefore the review procedure followed does not comply with the requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 2. The project violates the criteria of ECDC 20.10.070(A) relating to building design in that it fails to comply with the requirements of the Urban Design Guideline that the project be (a) “sensitive to the presence of historic buildings and landmarks” and (b) “compatible with its surroundings.” 3. That the project fails to comply with design criteria ECDC 20.10.070(A)(4) and the Urban Design Guidelines which discourage “long, massive, unbroken or monotonous buildings…” C. At the closed record hearing before the City Council, the appellant presented numerous points, many of which were not raised at the ADB or in the appeal letter. D. The appellant’s presentation argued that the ADB had failed to show its work and that there was “…little or no discussion by the board of the design criteria, the color scheme, finishes, materials (tiles, paint chips, detail features, etc.) other than the awning dimensions.” II. FINDINGS A. The ADB approved the project with conditions but did not enter specific findings with citations to the Urban Design Guidelines or the approval criteria for the Old Milltown project. {WSS644920.DOC;1/00006.900000/} 1 B. The ADB referenced the staff finding regarding the zoning code but did not adopt staff findings by reference. No specific findings were adopted by the Board beyond the minute entry of its decision. C. The appellant requests remand to provide clarity to the ADB decision. D. The Edmonds Community Development Code provides: 1. ECDC 20.105.020(A)(3) requires that an appellant state in his or her appeal letter why the decision appealed from is “wrong.” 2. ECDC 20.105.040(E) permits the City Council to remand a matter for “clarification.” The Council is required to specify the items or issues “to be considered and the time frame for completing the additional work.” 3. ECC 10.05.010 provides for the appointment of an Architectural Design Board that includes architects, designers, builders, developers, planners and knowledgeable lay persons in its membership. By its nature, the Architectural Design Board is intended to provide the City Council with the perspective of knowledgeable professionals as well as interested citizens. E. State statute provides: 1. RCW 36.70B.060 states that “the review process shall provide for no more than one consolidated open record hearing and one closed record appeal.” 2. RCW 36.70B.120(2) provides a similar requirement that “…a single open record hearing and no more than one closed record appeal…” may be held on any project. III. CONCLUSIONS A. The Architectural Design Board did not provide written findings explicating the application of the Urban Design Guidelines to the criteria established by ECDC 20.10.070. The Architectural Design Board could have, but did not adopt the staff report, except for a reference to compliance with the “zoning code.” B. The ADB has particular expertise in the review of building plans, design proposals and the application of the Urban Design Guidelines. The Urban Design Guidelines were developed based upon the specific recommendations of the Architectural Design Board. C. State statute prohibits a holding of additional closed or open hearings, and therefore the addition of new evidence or additional parties. At this point in the process, one open record hearing and one closed record hearing have been held. No new hearings are permitted by state statute. {WSS644920.DOC;1/00006.900000/} 2 D. The City Council may remand a matter for clarification and provide that it be returned to the City Council within a specified period of time. The Council concludes that the Architectural Design Board should be required to show its work and address the points raised in the appeal letter. They should do so by specific reference to code criteria and the Urban Design Guidelines with appropriate references to the record. E. The City Council therefore concludes that this matter should be remanded for clarification to the Architectural Design Board for the entrance of written findings of fact and conclusions of law that provide references to the record and to the Urban Design Guidelines for its findings in the four specific areas addressed in Ms. Larman’s appeal letter. This process should be completed as expeditiously as possible with the written decision to be returned to the City Council on or before the _____ day of November, 2006. IV. DECISION This matter is remanded to the Architectural Design Board for clarification, to wit: A. Citation to the record, to the Urban Design Guidelines regarding the basis for the Board’s determination that the application complies with the zoning code as required by ECDC 20.10.060(B). Specifically, the Council requests reference to that portion of the record which supports the determination that the square footage of the new commercial space complies with the requirements of ECDC 20.10.050, ECDC 20.15A.080 and WAC 197-11-800. B. Citation to the record and the Urban Design Guideline which support a finding that the requirements of ECDC 20.10.070(A) have been met regarding the avoidance of “conflict with the existing and planned character of the nearby area.” The Board’s attention is specifically drawn to the Urban Design Guidelines, Section II, A, 4, a, 1 through 3. The Board is requested to cite to the colors and materials contained or referenced in the record which supports its findings. C. Citations to the record and to the Urban Design Guidelines which support the Board’s finding that the requirements of ECDC 20.10.070(A)(4) have been met, to-wit, that the proposal is not a “long, massive, unbroken or monotonous” building. Please provide findings with reference to Urban Design Guidelines, Section II, A, 4, b, 2. D. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the Board to continue its current findings if, based upon the Board’s further review of the record and the Urban Design Guidelines, the Board determines that any criteria have not been met and their decision should be changed. In that event, the Board should clarify any change in its original decision with the same recitation to the record to the Urban Design Guidelines, and the design criteria which have been directed in this decision. E. This remand is to the Board in its deliberative phase. No new evidence shall be taken by the Board, no new parties admitted, and no additional arguments shall be received. The parties of record may, at their discretion, provide written proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Board’s consideration. Such submittals shall be made to the {WSS644920.DOC;1/00006.900000/} 3 Architectural Design Board through the City’s planning department three (3) business days prior to the date set for the Board’s continued deliberation. Any proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law which contain new evidence, argument or any other matter not contained in the current record shall be summarily rejected in their entirety. The Board’s decision shall be returned to the City Council on or before the _____ day of November, 2006. At that time, the Council, following notification to the parties of record, shall continue its deliberation. This decision shall be interpreted in accordance with the requirements of the Regulatory Reform Act, Chapter 36.70B. RCW and specifically, RCW 36.70B.120. The remand to the Architectural Design Board is for clarification only and no new party, argument or evidence shall be permitted. The matter shall be returned to the City Council for its continued deliberation and disposition. No new open record hearing shall be held by the Architectural Design Board and the Council, and closed record review before the City Council has been closed. DONE this _______ day of _____________, 2006. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL By: President {WSS644920.DOC;1/00006.900000/} 4 AM-675 6. Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Dave Gebert, Engineering Time:30 Minutes Department:Engineering Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Public Hearing regarding the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Previous Council Action On July 11, 2006, Staff presented an overview of the draft Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan to the Community Services/Development Services Committee. Narrative The Engineering Division has completed the Draft Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Staff The Engineering Division has completed the Draft Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Staff gave an overview of the Plan to the Community Services/ Development Services (CS/DS) Committee on July 11, 2006. See attached minutes. The plan identifies problems in the Sanitary Sewage conveyance system based on 1) Feedback and input from the Public Works Sewer Division, 2) Hydraulic analysis of the pipe system, 3) Run time information from the sewer lift stations, and 4) Flow meter information from the City’s treatment plant. The plan prioritizes the problems and lays out a schedule to construct and implement the required improvements. The only significant change to the plan since the previous draft was presented to the Community Services/Development Services Committee is the addition of a section regarding wastewater treatment capacity. The Plan has been thoroughly reviewed by Public Works and Engineering staff and has been reviewed and approved by the Department of Ecology. All neighboring sewer districts have been sent copies of the plan as well. On October 11, 2006 a public hearing was held regarding the plan before the Planning Board, and the Planning Board forwarded the plan to City Council with a recommendation for approval. See attached Planning Board minutes. The Planning Board also strongly recommended authorization of the proposed new Utility Engineer position, which is included in the draft Sewer Comprehensive Plan beginning in 2008, to help facilitate and accomplish the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The cost of this new position would be paid from the Utility rate revenues and has already been included in the recent Utility rate study. This position is not presently included in the proposed 2007-2008 budget. Due to the size of the document, a copy of the draft Sewer Comprehensive Plan will be provided separately to Council members. This public hearing is to be held as part of the comprehensive plan adoption process. Staff will present an overview of the plan prior to public comment. Recommendation Council approve the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan and authorize the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for an amendment to the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan, in conjunction with the annual Comprehensive Plan update. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: CS/DS Committee minutes Link: Planning Board minutes Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 Development Services Duane Bowman 11/02/2006 09:10 AM APRV 2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 09:25 AM APRV 3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 10:01 AM APRV 4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:39 PM APRV Started On: 11/01/2006 03:51 Form Started By: Dave Gebert Started On: 11/01/2006 03:51 PM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee July 11, 2006 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Michael Plunkett, Committee Chair Duane Bowman, Dev. Services Director Mauri Moore, Council Member David Gebert, City Engineer Don Fiene, Assistant City Engineer Don Sims, Traffic Engineer Chairman Plunkett convened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. A. Discussion on Street Vendor Regulations. Duane Bowman, Development Services Director, outlined the past actions on the development of street vendor regulations. The orginal regulations were developed in the late 1980’s which then allowed trailers to be used by a street vendor. In 2004 after having much difficulty enforcing the regulations, the City Council approved a change in the ordinance which now prohibits trailers. Mr. Bowman pointed out that a few years back staff discussed the concept of having the City build small pads in the park area adjacent to the ferry lanes with water and power and then allow vendors to bid on the spaces with the city receiving revenue from the vendors. The City could control the size and design of the buildings that would be constructed on the pads. Mr. Bowman displayed photographs of the trailer that Mr. Andrews from Milltown Pizza would like to use. Council member Moore felt that we were not being business friendly by not allowing the use of trailers and that as a beach front community this type of use was appropriate. She recommended that the Committee forward a recommendation to modify the ordinance and discuss the possibility of creating vendor pads. Chair Plunkett concurred. ACTION: Recommend that the City revise its ordinance to allow trailers and explore the concept of vendor pads within the park and unopened right-of-way and the matter be reviewed by the City Council on July 25, 2006.. B. Discussion on 2006 Comprehensive Sewer Plan Don Fiene introduced the topic and reviewed his future presentation regarding the update of the City’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan. He noted the identified problems and budget for implementing the plan. The Planning Board will review the plan on July 13, 2006 and it has been sent to the Washington State Department of Ecology for review. The City Council will review the plan September 2006. ACTION: No Action taken. C. Discussion on Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan Don Sims, Traffic Engineer introduced the topic. He noted that the City is required by the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) to develop a six-year transportation improvement plan (TIP). The first three years of the plan must be financially constrained and the remaining three years does not have to be constrained. He reviewed the TIP and noted that the City Council will be holding a public hearing on July 18, 2006. ACTION: No Action taken. The Committee meeting adjourned at 6:34 p.m. AM-673 7. 2007-08 Budget & Revenue Source Hearing Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By: Dan Clements, Administrative Services Time:30 Minutes Department:Administrative Services Type:Information Review Committee:Finance Action: Agenda Memo Subject Public Hearing on the 2007-08 Budget and Revenue Sources. Previous Council Action The budget was presented to Council on October 17, and Councilmembers have submitted two sets of budget related questions to date. Additional Council discussion is set for November 14 and 21. Narrative The public hearing is an opportunity for the Council to receive public input on the 2007-08 Preliminary Budget. Following a brief budget overview and discussion of revenue and property tax proposals, interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on the budget. Also attached as part of this agenda item are responses to the second set of budget related questions raised by Council. Recommendation Receive public input. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Budget Hearing Link: Budget Response 2 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 03:08 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/01/2006 03:41 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 03:55 PM APRV Form Started By: Dan Clements Started On: 11/01/2006 02:46 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2006 2007-08 Preliminary Budget Page 1 City of Edmonds 2007-08 Preliminary Budget November 6, 2006 2007-08 Budget Public Hearing Purpose of the Public Hearing –Receive public comments about the proposed budget –Provide information about revenues, and potential property tax increases Present a brief overview of 2007-08 budget highlights, open for public input Council packet also contains the second response to questions Council has raised 2007-08 Preliminary Budget Page 2 2007-08 Budget Overview Total Budget Size and Change –2007 totals $70.5 million, less than 1% increase over 2006 Budget •$2.5 million increase in operations - General & Utility Funds •Offset by decreases in several Capital Funds –2008 totals $65.9 million, 6.5% decrease General Fund Size and Change –2007 totals $31.9 million, 4.8% increase over 2006 Budget •State Pension Rate Increases •Full Year of Street Crime Unit •Court and Incarceration Charges –2008 totals $33.2 million, 4.0% increase 2007-08 Tax & Fee Changes 2007 Property Taxes –1.0% Statutory Rate Increase –1.6% Remaining Banked Capacity 2007 Average Utility Rate Increase of 0.25% 2007-08 Annual Water Rate Increase of 3% for Capital Replacement Program 2008 Emergency Medical Services Levy 2007-08 Preliminary Budget Page 3 2007 Property Tax Distribution Where Each Dollar of Property Tax is Distributed City, 15.0%EMS, 3.7%County, 9.8%Port, Lib Hosp, 6.9%Schools, 64.0%` 2007-08 Major Budget Changes No Staffing Increases: Transition of One Police Sergeant from Grant to General Fund Miscellaneous Equipment Replacement Utility Billing e-Payment System In 2007, Develop Plan for $500,000 in General Fund Reductions for 2009 2007-08 Preliminary Budget Page 4 General Fund Projection Model With & Without 2007 Utility Tax and 2008 EMS Levy (4,000,000) (3,000,000) (2,000,000) (1,000,000) - 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 8% of Expenditure Fund Balance Balance w ith Utility Tax in 2007, EMS Levy in 2008 Without utility taxes to 6% and 2008 EMS Levy 2007-08 Budget Adoption Schedule Remaining Budget Schedule November 6: Public Hearing and Revenues November 14: Council Budget Deliberations November 21: Second Budget Public Hearing –Possible Budget Adoption –Property Tax Ordinance County Assessor Additional Possible Dates, if Needed –November 28 –December 5, 12, 19 City of Edmonds 121 FIFTH AVENUE N. ● EDMONDS, WA 98020 ● 425-771-0239 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Gary Haakenson Mayor Dan Clements Director November 1, 2006 Deanna Dawson, President Edmonds City Council 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Reference: Follow-Up Responses to Council Budget Questions Dear Deanna: This correspondence will provide responses to questions raised by Councilmembers at the October 24 City Council meeting. The six questions were: 1.) Possible funding sources for a compensation consultant; 2.) Rationale for purchasing a large format copier; 3,) Funding for tree removal on Main Street between Fifth and Sixth Avenues; 4.) Clarification as to why the City’s levy rate continues to fall; 5.) Additional details about the proposed EMS levy; and 6.) Future departmental needs not addressed by the 2007-08 budget. Compensation Consultant Funding Should the Council wish to retain a compensation consultant, staff would recommend using ending fund balance, pro-rated between the General and other funds on the basis of number of exempt staff. For example, if Council wished to appropriate $75,000 for this study, this cost would be split in the following manner. FIGURE 1: COMPENSATION CONSULTANT FUNDING Fund Appropriation General Fund $ 61,500 Utility Fund 11,750 Fleet Management 1,750 Total $ 75,000 Large Format Copier The large format copier is needed to provide copies of large scale plans requested by the public or needed by staff as part of review of a project. The City is required to keep plans for the life of the building plus 10 years. Often customers come in and request a copy of the plans. Because these are our only copy, we cannot release them to be taken outside for copying. Development Services’ current copier has reached its optimum life. Regarding the ongoing costs, those costs are for annual service support. Budget Question Response, Page 2 The proposed new copier has the following capabilities: • Works as standard copier • Can scan large engineering drawings • Can link to desk pc and print and plot (just like our copiers and plotter do now) • Produce 1/2 size drawings • With PDF multiples option- can bring up multiple sheets without going thru Acrobat; select specific sheets (including large engineering drawings) or pages and turn those into PDF files. The new copier gives staff greater flexibility to create documents in different formats. Tree Removal The Street and Parks Divisions have budgeted for the removal and replacement of the City street trees along with associated sidewalk repairs on Main Street between Fifth and Sixth Avenues. The work on the south side of the street will be done in 2007 and the work on the north side will be done in 2008. City Levy Rate Decline The levy rate question centered around why the City levy rate continues to fall. The reason is that levy rates decrease in almost exactly the same rate as property assessments rise. For example, in most cases if a property’s assessed valuation doubles, the levy rate drops in half, plus a 1% increase. Voter approved issues or use of banked capacity are in addition to this formula. EMS Levy Staff were asked to provide information relating to EMS levy revenue and program costs. Figures 1 and 2 below will provide this information. As can be seen, the costs of providing emergency medical services have increased substantially more than revenues derived from the EMS levy. General Fund support for EMS services totaled $2.6 million in 2005, and is anticipated to reach $3.25 million by 2008. FIGURE 2: EMS LEVY REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES Item 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 EMS Levy Revenue 2,203,634 2,318,000 2,383,536 2,425,433 2,466,282 2,506,614 2,546,756 2,586,729 EMS Expenditures 4,841,577 5,321,404 5,486,784 5,673,952 5,849,805 6,049,486 6,263,616 6,487,928 General Fund Contribution 2,637,944 3,003,404 3,103,248 3,248,519 3,383,523 3,542,872 3,716,860 3,901,199 2008 EMS Levy n/a n/a n/a 1,233,830 1,254,610 1,275,127 1,295,548 1,315,882 General Fund Contribution n/a n/a n/a 2,014,689 2,128,913 2,267,744 2,421,312 2,585,317 GF % Contribution 54.5% 56.4% 56.6% 57.3% 57.8% 58.6% 59.3% 60.1% GF % Contribution w 2008 54.5% 56.4% 56.6% 35.5% 36.4% 37.5% 38.7% 39.8% If an EMS levy were approved by voters in 2007 for fiscal 2008, the General Fund contribution for Emergency Medical Services would drop from $3.25 million to $2.01 million in 2008, and would cover approximately 36% of the program’s cost. Budget Question Response, Page 3 The fire Department has provided a background paper discussing the EMS issue in greater detail. It is attached as an appendix to this correspondence. Unmet Departmental Needs The last question dealt with unmet departmental needs, and what is not contained in the 2007-08 budget. I believe this will be discussed in the form of a dialogue with Council on November 14, but below is a rough outline of departmental needs that were brought up during budget deliberations. FIGURE 3: UNMET DEPARTMENTAL NEEDS Development Services Storm Water Engineer Economic Development Highway 99 Impact Analysis Fire Department (See attachment) Fire Inspector/Public Educator Vehicle Reserve Major Equipment Reserve Training Facility EMS Staffing Information Systems Network and systems support Parks, Recreation, & Cultural Services Parks Maintenance Labor Flower Basket Labor Training Equipment Replacement Police Department Support Services Staffing Facility Public Works Street Repair and Maintenance Facilities Repair and Maintenance Attachment Attached please find correspondence from the Fire Chief that provides more in depth responses to what is not funded in the 2007-08 budget, and additional EMS background. If you have any additional questions or comments, staff will he happy to respond to them. OFFICE OF THE FIRE CHIEF Date: October 27, 2006 To: Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director From: Thomas J. Tomberg, Fire Chief Subject: October 25 Council Budget Questions on the 2007-2008 Budget Below are the responses to the two questions posed by Council at the October 25 2007-2008 budget session pertinent to the Fire Department. 3. All Departments - future departmental needs, what is the 2007-2008 budget not funding? (Council President Dawson). Two items were partially funded or not funded as part of the 2007-2008 process: 1. The full cost of overtime was partially funded at $35,000 for 2007 ($100,000 requested) and at $40,000 for 2008 ($105,000 requested). 2. Annually setting aside funds to replace self-contained breathing apparatus, defibrillators, and mobile digital computers for the vehicles was not funded ($40,768 requested in 2007, $41,991 requested in 2008). An immediate need not requested due to grim budget projections is: 3. A fulltime fire inspector / public educator assigned to the Fire Prevention Division bringing that Division to 3 FTEs, and full-time day staff to 7, still .5 below the January 1, 1997 Ewing & Company Human Resources Study recommendation of 7.5 personnel. Future needs identified for study in the 2007-2008 Work Plan are: 4. Access to or construction of a local training facility that allows on-duty crews to remain in the immediate area. Consider existing facilities, a new facility, multidisciplinary use, scope, costs, location, and political feasibility. 5. Staffing additions to meet the increased demand for service associated with community demographics and expanding EMS call volumes. 4. More detail on EMS levy, how we look in the future (Council President Dawson and Council member Wambolt). Council President Dawson asked, EDMONDS FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM Budget Question Response, Page 5 “How does the EMS levy play into not just the Fire budget but the overall City budget?” Fire Staff and Administrative Services Staff developed 2007-2008 EMS delivery costs based on 73 percent (EMS percent of total emergency call load) of the Administration, Operations, Training, Volunteers, ALS, and Alarm Dispatch budgets, plus other expenditures not reflected in the 2007-2008 Fire Department budget using the same 73 percent percentage of EMS costs (See attachment). Based on the above calculations, EMS costs in 2007 are $5,466,468, exceeding the 2007 ALS budget of $1,558,300, and $5,651,285 in 2008, exceeding the 2008 ALS budget of $1,208,499. In 2007, the current EMS levy is estimated to generate $2,383,536. Restoring the EMS levy to .50 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation from its 2007 estimated rate of .36 cents allows the City to cover more ALS costs with funds generated by the EMS levy and less from General Fund monies generated by the property tax. C: Mayor Haakenson Attachment Budget Question Response, Page 6 EMS Costs Sheet By Call Volume Percent 2007 2007 Fire Prev. TOTAL Minus FP 73% Total Fire Dept Budget 7,028,170 247,327 6,780,843 4,950,015 Station 20 Contract Payment 65,954 0 65,954 48,146 Transfer to Fd511 App. Rep. 199,145 0 199,145 145,376 Transfer to Fire Pension 51,500 0 51,500 37,595 1996-2003 Pub Safe Bond 196,837 0 196,837 143,691 ESCA 26,130 0 26,130 19,075 800Mhz Sno Cty Bond 19,393 0 19,393 14,157 Transfer to LEOFF Health 148,510 0 148,510 108,412 7,735,639 247,327 7,488,312 5,466,468 2008 2008 Fire Prev. TOTAL Minus FP 73% Total Fire Dept Budget 7,256,018 257,619 6,998,399 5,108,831 Station 20 Contract Payment 65,954 0 65,954 48,146 Transfer to Fd511 App. Rep. 204,124 0 204,124 149,011 Transfer to Fire Pension 53,000 0 53,000 38,690 1996-2003 Pub Safe Bond 204,343 0 204,343 149,170 ESCA 28,743 0 28,743 20,982 800Mhz Sno Cty Bond 19,406 0 19,406 14,166 Transfer to LEOFF Health 167,517 0 167,517 122,287 7,999,105 257,619 7,741,486 5,651,285 Methodology: Total EFD budget, minus Fire Prevention expenses (Theoretically, Fire Prevention has no EMS related costs), for a total Fire/EMS cost. EMS represents 73% of the calls responded to by the EFD. Apply the 73% to the adjusted budget amount for a grand total. AM-668 8. Public Hearing Moratorium 25 Foot Height Limit Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Duane Bowman, Development Services Time:15 Minutes Department:Development Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Public hearing on the extension of Ordinance No. 3595 – a zoning moratorium on the acceptance of Architectural Design Board applications or building permit applications, not otherwise vested pursuant to state law prior to date of enactment of this ordinance which seek to utilize modulated design in order to obtain a building height in excess of the twenty-five foot height limitation established by ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2). (Ordinance No. 3595 expires 11/26/06.) Previous Council Action On January 4, 2005 the City Council passed Resolution 1081 establishing January 18, 2005 as the date for a public hearing on a series of issues stemming from a Superior Court case involving a construction project in the BC zone. On January 18, 2005, the City Council passed Ordinance 3530 imposing a zoning moratorium on the acceptance of Architectural Design Board applications or building permit applications, not otherwise vested pursuant to State Law prior to date of enactment of this ordinance which seek to utilize modulated design in order to obtain a building height in excess of the twenty-five foot height limitation established by ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2), and providing for expiration. The interim ordinance has been extended an additional three times under Ordinances 3555, 3576 and 3595. Narrative The Planning Board has forwarded their recommendation to the City Council on potential code changes to the Downtown Commercial area. The Council has continued the matter while resolving a quasi-judicial hearing. It is anticipated that the Council will complete their review by the end of the year. It is appropriate to extend the ordinance. Recommendation Motion to adopt the proposed ordinance extending Ordinance No. 3595, a zoning moratorium, on the acceptance of Architectural Design Board applications or building permit applications, not otherwise vested pursuant to state law prior to date of enactment of this ordinance which seek to utilize modulated design in order to obtain a building height in excess of the twenty-five foot height limitation established by ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2). Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - Draft Ordinance Building Height Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:56 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 04:00 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 04:04 PM APRV Form Started By: Duane Bowman Started On: 10/31/2006 10:12 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 11/02/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD APPLICATIONS OR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS, NOT OTHERWISE VESTED PURSUANT TO STATE LAW PRIOR TO DATE OF ENACTMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE WHICH SEEK TO UTILIZE MODULATED DESIGN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A BUILDING HEIGHT IN EXCESS OF THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION ESTABLISHED BY ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2), PROVIDING FOR EXPIRATION, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the decision of the Snohomish County Superior Court in Bauer v. City of Edmonds interpreted certain provisions of City ordinance in a manner different than they have been historically and consistently applied by the City, and WHEREAS, said decision controls the application considered in the Land Use Petition Act case but does not have controlling precedential value with respect to other applications which may be filed with the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of its Planning Board regarding changes to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code which may address any or all of these issues, but is in the midst of deliberations in a quasi-judicial proceeding and does not want a frank discussion of the recommendations to appear to violate the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine nor to discuss issues raised in the quasi-judicial proceeding outside of the context of that decision, and {WSS645290.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - WHEREAS, the City Council deemed it to be in the public interest to enact a zoning moratorium by Ordinance 3530, and extended by Ordinance 3555, 3576 and 3595 until such time as either a regular change in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning code is enacted or until such time as interim zoning measures clarifying the City’s position could be enacted, and WHEREAS, the original moratorium is about to expire, and following public hearing on November 6, 2006, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to extend the moratorium noting its continuing good faith efforts to review alternatives regarding building height in the downtown area, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to RCW 36.63.020, 36.70.795 and 36.70A.390, a moratorium is hereby renewed on the receipt of applications of Architectural Design Board approval or building permit approval for projects not otherwise vested pursuant to state law or City ordinance, which seek to utilize the provisions of ECDC 16.50.020(A)(2) in order to obtain a height limit in excess of twenty-five feet based in whole or in part upon modulated building design. Section 2. This ordinance is limited to six months duration and shall expire on its own terms unless extended following public hearing, by act of the City Council. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. {WSS645290.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {WSS645290.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD APPLICATIONS OR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS, NOT OTHERWISE VESTED PURSUANT TO STATE LAW PRIOR TO DATE OF ENACTMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE WHICH SEEK TO UTILIZE MODULATED DESIGN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A BUILDING HEIGHT IN EXCESS OF THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION ESTABLISHED BY ECDC 15.40.020(A)(2), PROVIDING FOR EXPIRATION, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS645290.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 4 - AM-669 9. Public Hearing on Moratorium Views Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Duane Bowman, Development Services Time:15 Minutes Department:Development Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Public hearing on the extension of Ordinance No. 3596 – a zoning moratorium on the application of ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) relating to the imposition of special height limits to protect views. (Ordinance No. 3596 expires 11/26/06.) Previous Council Action On January 4, 2005 the City Council passed Resolution 1081 establishing January 18, 2005 as the date for a public hearing on a series of issues stemming from a Superior Court case involving a construction project in the BC zone. On January 18, 2005, the City Council passed Ordinance 3532 imposing a zoning moratorium on application of ECDC 20.10.070 (C) (3) relating to the imposition of special height limits to protect views. The interim ordinance has been extended an additional three times under Ordinances 3555, 3577 and 3596. Narrative The Planning Board has forwarded their recommendation to the City Council on potential code changes to the Downtown Commercial area. The Council has continued the matter while resolving a quasi-judicial hearing. It is anticipated that the Council will complete their review by the end of the year. It is appropriate to extend the ordinance. Recommendation Motion to adopt the proposed ordinance extending Ordinance No. 3596, a zoning moratorium, on the application of ECDC 20.10.070(C) (3) relating to the imposition of special height limits to protect views. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - Draft Ordinance on View Regulation Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 03:56 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/02/2006 04:00 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 04:04 PM APRV Started On: 10/31/2006 11:01 Form Started By: Duane Bowman Started On: 10/31/2006 11:01 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2006 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 11/02/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE APPLICATION OF ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION OF SPECIAL HEIGHT LIMITS TO PROTECT VIEWS, ESTABLISHING AN EXPIRATION DATE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the decision of the Snohomish County Superior Court in Bauer v. City of Edmonds interpreted certain provisions of City ordinance in a manner different than they have been historically and consistently applied by the City staff and Architectural Design Board, and WHEREAS, said decision controls the application considered in the Land Use Petition Act case but does not have controlling precedential value with respect to other applications which may be filed with the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of its Planning Board regarding changes to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code which may address any or all of these issues, but is in the midst of the deliberations in a quasi-judicial proceeding and does not want a frank discussion of the recommendations to appear to violate the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine or to discuss issues raised in the quasi-judicial proceeding outside of the context of that decision, and WHEREAS, the court in Bauer interpreted the term “view” as utilized in ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) to include a view of the sky, and {WSS645287.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - WHEREAS, the City staff and Architectural Design Board have consistently interpreted the word “view” to exclude “shadowing,” that is, the architectural concept that a structure may block sunlight and limit the sky, and WHEREAS, the City is under the obligation in its architectural design process to meet the following standard: Clearly, however, aesthetic standards are an appropriate component of land use governance. Whenever a community adopts such standards they can and must be drafted to give clear guidance to all parties concerned. Applicants must have an understandable statement of what it expected from new construction. Design professionals need to know in advance what standards will be acceptable in a given community. It is unreasonable to expect applicants to pay for repetitive revisions of plans in an effort to comply with unarticulated, unpublished “statements.” It is equally unreasonable, and a deprivation of due process, to expect or allow a design review board … to create standards on an ad hoc basis, during the design review process. Anderson v. Issaquah, 71 Wash. App. 64, 82-83 (Div. I, 1992) WHEREAS, the provisions of ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) do not contain definitions of the word “view,” “substantial blockage,” nor “surrounding properties,” and such terms are utilized in the sections regarding a special height limit should substantial view blockage occur, and WHEREAS, the City Council enacted a moratorium on the application of ECDC 20.10.070 (C)(3) by Ordinance 3532 and extended by Ordinance 3556, 3577 and 3596; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendations of its Planning Board regarding changes to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code which may address any or all of these issues, but is in the midst of deliberations in a quasi-judicial proceeding and does not want a frank discussion of the recommendations to appear to violate the Appearance of Fairness {WSS645287.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - Doctrine nor to discuss issues raised in the quasi-judicial proceeding outside of the context of that decision, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held regarding the extension of the moratorium on November 6, 2006, and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it appropriate to extend the moratorium on the application of ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) until such time as the terms have been defined or the Council deems it to be in the public interest to repeal said provision, thereby assuring compliance with Anderson v. Issaquah, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to RCW 36.63.020; 36.70.795, and 36.70A.390 a moratorium is hereby extended on the application of ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) relating to the imposition of special height limitations to protect views. Section 2. This ordinance is limited to six months duration and shall expire on its own terms unless extended following public hearing, by act of the City Council. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS645287.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {WSS645287.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE APPLICATION OF ECDC 20.10.070(C)(3) RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION OF SPECIAL HEIGHT LIMITS TO PROTECT VIEWS, ESTABLISHING AN EXPIRATION DATE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {WSS645287.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 5 - AM-681 10. Public Hearing on proposed amendments to the General Commercial (CG and CG2) zones. Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Rob Chave, Planning Submitted For:Rob Chave Time:30 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Public hearing on recommendations by the Planning Board for amendments to Chapter 16.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code concerning the General Commercial (CG and CG2) Zones. Previous Council Action None. Narrative This is a public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation to adopt proposed changes to Chapter 16.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). The changes would m odify the existing General Commercial zones (CG and CG2) to be more in keeping with the recommendations of the Highway 99 Task Force recommendations to clarify and improve permitted uses and standards while streamlining permitting for these high-intensity commercial areas. The draft code language is contained in Exhibit 1, with the recommendations of the Highway 99 Task Force contained in Exhibit 2. The Planning Board minutes are contained in Exhibit 3. In brief, the changes would: -- Increase the basic height limits in the CG and CG2 zones from 35 and 45 feet to 60 and 75 feet, respectively. -- Remove the requirement to obtain a conditional use permit for higher building heights. -- Provide greater flexibility in the arrangement of uses for large-scale mixed use developments. -- Include specific site design standards for development in the CG zones. Note that the Planning Board has deferred amendments and zoning actions related to the new mixed use (BR) zone pending further study. Recommendation Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the recommendations of the Planning Board. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: Draft code language Link: Exhibit 2: Task Force memo Link: Exhibit 3: Planning Board minutes Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2006 04:37 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/03/2006 09:24 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/03/2006 09:49 AM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 11/02/2006 04:10 PM Final Approval Date: 11/03/2006 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 1 Chapter 16.60 CG – GENERAL COMMERCIAL: CG AND CG2 ZONES Sections: 16.60.000 CG and CG2 zones. 16.60.005 Purposes. 16.60.010 Uses. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. 16.60.020 Site development standards – General. 16.60.030 Site development standards – Design Standards. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. 16.60.000 CG and CG2 zones. This chapter establishes the general commercial zoning district comprised of two distinct zoning categories which are identical in all respects except as specifically provided for in ECDC 16.60.020(A). [Ord. 2527 § 7, 1985]. 16.60.005 Purposes. The CG and CG2 zones have the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Encourage the development and retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city. Mixed use and transit-oriented developments are encouraged which provide significant commercial uses as a component of an overall mixed development scheme. B. Improve access and circulation for people by encouraging a development pattern that supports transit and pedestrian access. Improve vehicular circulation and access to support business and economic development. C. Provide and encourage the opportunity for different sections along the Highway 99 corridor to emphasize their unique characteristics and development opportunities rather than require the corridor to develop as an undifferentiated continuum. New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. D. Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. Where designated in the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning should encourage mixed use or taller high-rise development to occur. E. Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses. F. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 2 provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially-zoned properties. G. Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor. Establish uniform signage regulations for all properties within the corridor area which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter and distraction to the public. Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian-friendly (e.g., add trees and landscaping) through a combination of development requirements and – when available – public investment. H. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes designated in the Comprehensive Plan should provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: • Supported by adequate services and facilities; • Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, differentiated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. • Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including automobile, transit and pedestrian access. • Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. 16.60.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. All permitted or conditional uses in any other zone in this title, except as specifically prohibited by subsection C of this section or limited by subsection D of this section; 2. Any additional use except as specifically prohibited by subsection C of this section or limited by subsection D of this section; 3. Halfway houses; 4. Sexually oriented businesses, which shall comply with the location standards set forth in ECDC 16.60.015">16.60.015, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and the licensing regulations set forth in Chapter 4.52 ECC. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use. 2. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas secondary or integral to a permitted primary use, such as storage or display areas for automobile sales, building materials or building supply sales, or garden/nursery sales. Such outdoor storage or display areas shall be designed and organized to meet the design standards for parking areas for the CG zone, contained in this Chapter. Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 3 C. Prohibited Uses. 1. Residential Uses located within the first or second story of any structure, in areas designated “Highway 99 Corridor” or “High-rise Node” on the comprehensive plan map. There are two exceptions to this prohibition: a. Residential uses may be allowed as part of large-scale mixed use developments, as described in Section 16.60.020.B; and, b. Residential uses are allowed on the second floor of buildings that are not located in areas designated as “High-rise Node” on the comprehensive plan map and which are not located on lots that have frontage on Highway 99. 2. Mobile Home parks. 3. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas intended as a primary use, not secondary to a permitted commercial or residential use. Automobile wrecking yards, junk yards, or businesses primarily devoted to storage or mini storage are examples of this type of prohibited use. D. Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC; 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. All sexually oriented businesses shall comply with the requirements of this section, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and Chapter 4.52 ECC. The standards established in this section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit the following activities or products: (a) expressive dance; (b) plays, operas, musicals, or other dramatic works; (c) classes, seminars, or lectures conducted for a scientific or educational purpose; (d) printed materials or visual representations intended for educational or scientific purposes; (e) nudity within a locker room or other similar facility used for changing clothing in connection with athletic or exercise activities; (f) nudity within a hospital, clinic, or other similar medical facility for health-related purposes; and (g) all movies and videos that are rated G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 by the Motion Picture Association of America. A. Separation Requirements. A sexually oriented business shall only be allowed to locate where specifically permitted and only if the following separation requirements are met: 1. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected zones whether such protected zone is located within or outside the city limits: a. A residential zone as defined in Chapter 16.10 ECDC; b. A public use zone as defined in Chapter 16.80 ECDC. 2. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected uses whether such protected use is located within or outside the city limits: a. A public park; b. A public library; c. A nursery school or preschool; Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 4 d. A public or private primary or secondary school; e. A church, temple, mosque, synagogue, or other similar facility used primarily for religious worship; and f. A community center such as an amusement park, public swimming pool, public playground, or other facility of similar size and scope used primarily by children and families for recreational or entertainment purposes; g. A permitted residential use located in a commercial zone; h. A museum; and i. A public hospital or hospital district. 3. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet to any bar or tavern within or outside the city limits. B. Measurement. The separation requirements shall be measured by following a straight line from the nearest boundary line of a protected zone specified in subsection (A) of this section or nearest physical point of the structure housing a protected use specified in subsection (A) of this section, to the nearest physical point of the tenant space occupied by a sexually oriented business. C. Variance From Separation Requirements. Variances may be granted from the separation requirements in subsection (A) of this section if the applicant demonstrates that the following criteria are met: 1. The natural physical features of the land would result in an effective separation between the proposed sexually oriented business and the protected zone or use in terms of visibility and access; 2. The proposed sexually oriented business complies with the goals and policies of the community development code; 3. The proposed sexually oriented business is otherwise compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses; 4. There is a lack of alternative locations for the proposed sexually oriented business; and 5. The applicant has proposed conditions which would minimize the adverse secondary effects of the proposed sexually oriented business. D. Application of Separation Requirements to Existing Sexually Oriented Businesses. The separation requirements of this section shall not apply to a sexually oriented business once it has located within the city in accordance with the requirements of this section. [Ord. 3117 § 16, 1996]. Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 5 16.60.020 Site development standards – General. A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side/Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Floor Area CG None None 15′2 None1 60′3 None CG2 None None 15′2 None1 75′3 None 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property regardless of the setback provisions established by any other provision of this code. 2 Street setback area shall be fully landscaped. 3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the Comprehensive Plan map. B. Mixed Use Developments. 1. A mixture of commercial and residential uses, including residential uses located on the first or second floors of buildings, may be permitted for developments meeting the following requirements: a. The proposed development’s combined site area is at least two (2) acres. b. Floor area equivalent to the combined total leaseable area of the first (ground) floor for all buildings located on the site is devoted to commercial use. This commercial floor area may be provided in any manner desirable on-site, except that for all buildings oriented to and facing frontage streets, the street-facing portions of the ground floor shall be occupied by commercial uses. Parking area(s) are excluded from this calculation. This requirement is not intended to require commercial uses facing service drives, alleys, or other minor access easements that are not related to the main commercial streets serving the site. 16.60.030 Site development standards – Design Standards. Design review by the Architectural Design Board is required for any project that includes buildings exceeding 60 feet in height in the CG zone or 75 feet in height in the CG2 zone. Projects not exceeding these height limits may be reviewed by staff as a staff decision. Regardless of what review process is required, all projects proposed in the CG or CG2 zone must meet the design standards contained in this section (16.60.030). A. Screening and Buffering 1. General a. Screen all parking from view from public walkways with grills, fences, lattice, etc. or Type I vegetation 36 inches high. b. Retaining walls facing adjacent property or public rights-of-way shall not exceed seven feet in height. A minimum of four feet of planted terrace is required between stepped wall segments. c. Landscape buffers are not required in land use zones with no required building setback. Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 6 d. Tree landscaping may be clustered to block the view of a parking lot, yet allow visibility to signage and building entry. e. Landscape buffers shall be integrated into the design and layout of water detention and treatment elements, to minimize the physical and visual impacts of the water quality elements. f. Type III shall be used between parking and the street for commercial or mixed use projects. g. All parking lots are required to provide Type V interior landscaping. h. Type I landscaping is required for commercial, institutional and medical uses adjacent to single-family or multi-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of ten feet in width and continuous in length. i. Type I is required for residential parking areas adjacent to single-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and continuous in length. j. Type I landscaping is required for office and multi-family projects adjacent to single-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and ten feet in height and continuous in length. k. If there is a loading zone and/or trash compactor area next to a single- family or multi-family zone, there shall be a minimum of a six-foot high concrete wall plus a minimum width of five feet of Type I landscaping. Trash and utility storage elements shall not be permitted to encroach within street setbacks or within setbacks adjacent to single family zones. Mechanical equipment, including heat pumps and other mechanical elements, shall not be placed in the setbacks. l. Landscape buffers, Type I, shall be used in parking areas adjacent to single-family zones. m. When no setback is otherwise required, Type III landscaping three feet in width and continuous in length is required between uses in the same zone. 2. Parking Lots Abutting Streets. a. Type IV landscaping, minimum four feet wide, is required along all street frontages. b. All parking located under the building shall be completely screened from the public street by one of the following methods: i. Walls, ii. Type I planting and a grill that is 25 percent opaque, iii. Grill work that is at least 80 percent opaque, or iv. Type III landscaping. B. Access and Parking 1. Not more than 50% of total project parking spaces may be located between the building’s front facade and the primary street. 2. Parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets. 3. Paths within Parking Lots Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 7 a. Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that are approved by federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors as well as landscape barriers. b. Pedestrian access routes shall be provided at least every 180 feet within parking lots. These shall be designed to provide access to on-site buildings as well as pedestrian walkways that border the development. c. Pedestrian pathways shall be six feet in width and have two feet of planting on each side or have curb stops at each stall in the parking lot on one side and four feet of planting on the second side. i. Parking lots shall have pedestrian connections to the main sidewalk at a minimum of every 100 feet. 4. Bonus for Parking Below Grade a. For projects where at least 50% of the parking is below grade or under the building, the following code requirements may be modified for the parking that is provided below-grade or under-building. – The minimum drive aisle width may be reduced to 22 feet. – The maximum ramp slope may be increased to 20%. – A mixture of full- and reduced-width parking stalls may be provided without meeting the ECDC requirement to demonstrate that all required parking could be provided at full-width dimensions. 5. Drive-through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores, espresso stands, etc., shall comply with the following: a. Drive-through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the building that face a street. b. Drive-through speakers shall not be audible off-site. c. Only one direct entrance or exit from the drive-through shall be allowed as a separate curb cut onto an adjoining street. All remaining direct entrances/exits to the drive-through shall be internal to the site. 6. Pedestrian and Transit Access a. Pedestrian building entries must connect directly to the public sidewalk and to adjacent developments if feasible. b. Internal pedestrian routes shall extend to the property line and connect to existing pedestrian routes if applicable. Potential future connections shall also be identified such that pedestrian access between developments can occur without walking in the parking or access areas. c. When a transit or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the transit stop directly to the new development are required. C. Site Design and Layout 1. General. If a project is composed of similar building layouts that are repeated, then their location on the site design should not be uniform in its layout. If a project has a uniform site layout for parking and open spaces, then the buildings shall vary in form, materials, and/or identity. The following Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 8 design elements should be considered, and a project shall demonstrate how at least 5 of the elements were used to vary the design of the site: a. building massing and unit layout, b. placement of structures and setbacks, c. location of pedestrian and vehicular facilities, d. spacing from position relative to adjoining buildings, e. composition and types of open space, plant materials and street trees, f. types of building materials and/or elements h. roof variation in slope, height and/or materials. 2. Individuality for Particular Structures a. If a project contains several new or old buildings of similar uses or massing, incorporate two of the following options to create identity and promote safety and feeling of ownership: i. Individual entry design for each building. ii. Create variety in arrangement of building forms in relation to site, parking, open spaces, and the street. iii. Create variety through facade materials and organization. iv. Create variety through roof forms. v. Vary the size/mass of the buildings so they are not uniform in massing and appearance. 3. Lighting a. All lighting shall be shielded and directed away from adjacent parcels. This may be achieved through lower poles at the property lines and/or full “cut off” fixtures. b. Parking lots shall have lighting poles with a maximum of 25 feet in height. c. Pedestrian ways shall have low height lighting focused on pathway area. Pole height shall be a maximum of 14 feet although lighting bollards are prefered. d. Entries shall have lighting for safety and visibility integrated with the building/canopy. D. Building Design and Massing 1. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct ‘base’ and ‘top’. A ‘base’ and ‘top’ can be emphasized in different ways, such as masonry pattern, more architectural detail, step backs and overhangs, lighting, recesses, visible ‘plinth’ above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination thereof. They can also be emphasized by using architectural elements not listed above, as approved, that meet the intent. 2. In buildings with footprints of over 10,000 square feet, attention needs to be given to modulation, scale, and massing so as to reduce the effect of large single building masses. Ways to accomplish this can include articulation, changes of materials, offsets, setbacks, angles or curves of facades, or by the use of distinctive roof forms. This can also be accomplished by using architectural elements not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. Note that façade offsets or step-backs should not be applied to the ground floor of street-front facades in pedestrian-oriented zones or districts. Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 9 3. Alternatives to massing requirements may be achieved by: a. Creation of a public plaza or other open space may substitute for a massing requirement if the space is at least 1,000 sq. ft. in area. In commercial zones, this public space shall be a public plaza with amenities such as benches, tables, planters and other elements. b. Retaining or re-using an historic structure listed on the National Register or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. Any addition or new building on the site must be designed to be compatible with the historic structure. 4. To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting streets or residential properties, walls or portions of walls abutting streets or visible from residentially-zoned properties shall have architectural treatment applied by incorporating at least four of the following elements into the design of the façade: a. Masonry (except for flat concrete block) b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall c. Belt courses of a different texture and color d. Projecting cornice e. Projecting metal canopy f. Decorative tilework g. Trellis containing planting h. Medallions i. Artwork or wall graphics j. Vertical differentiation k. Lighting fixtures m. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except the following: 1. Public utilities; 2. Off-street parking and loading areas; 3. Drive-in business; 4. Secondary uses permitted under ECDC 16.60.010.B; 5. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC. 6. Community-oriented Open Air Markets or Seasonal Farmers Markets. 7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC. City of Edmonds Date: November 1, 2005 To: Edmonds Planning Board From: The Highway 99 Task Force, Council President Richard Marin, Chair Subject: Discussion points for review of CG and proposed BR zones The Highway 99 Task Force was established to review the City’s policies and regulations along Highway 99, and to identify ways to encourage economic development. As part of its ongoing work, the Task Force has been reviewing implementation issues related to the Highway 99 corridor. It is the belief of the Task Force that proposed revisions to the CG, BR and BR2 zones will have a direct poisitive affect on the redevelopment of Highway 99. In preparation for the Planning Board’s upcoming work to implement the policies in the Comprehensive Plan for the Highway 99 Corridor and neighboring area, the Highway 99 Task Force has completed a review of the CG zones and proposed BR and BR2 zones. The Task Force’s comments are intended to supplement the comments that were forwarded with the MAKERS and Berk & Associates reports for Highway 99, and to assist the Planning Board as it develops ways to implement the Comprehensive Plan’s direction for this area. General Recommendations for the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones: 1. Refine the list of permitted uses in the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones to meet economic development goals. 2. Expand the development envelope allowed as-of-right in the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones. 3. Eliminate conditional use permit processes in the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones, where possible, in order to eliminate unnecessary impediments and to streamline redevelopment 4. Recommend adoption of Design Guidelines for the CG and CG2 Highway 99 zones that will allow for administrative review of projects within as-of-right site standards. Consider Master Plan options with ADB design review for larger projects. MEMORANDUM Highway 99 Task Force Review Memo October, 2005 Page 2 5. Encourage Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones. 6. Utilize zoning, design guidelines, and streetscape enhancements to create districts. 7. Recommend adoption of clear policies governing the CG, CG2, BR and BR2 zones that are sensitive to potential impacts to adjacent RS zones. Existing General Commercial CG and CG2 Zones Because of their structure within the zoning code, the CG zones have effectively been rendered a “dumping ground” for nearly all uses. Instead, we are recommending that the purposes of the zone reflect the City’s desire to create a synergistic commercial and retail corridor. It is a zone in which we should encourage dense commercial and mixed-use development to: strengthen the local business community, increase revenues for the City, and provide amenities for nearby residential neighborhoods. At the same time, the City acknowledges the fact that this is an area that is designated to allow adult uses in very specific locations. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in the CG and CG2 zones along Highway 99 and in the BR and BR2 neighboring zones should be strongly encouraged and provisions included in our codes. This concept is being used very successfully around the country and world. It promotes ground-floor retail coupled with higher density residential in corridors well served by public transit. Community Tranist is taking a leading role in bringing Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to the Highway 99 corridor. Under the prohibited uses, we recommend prohibiting certain uses that do not generate significant revenues for the city in the entire CG zones for simplicity. As a starting point, you could incorporate the recent moratorium put in place on mobile home parks, storage facilities and ground floor residential. Storage facilities might be a consideration as a secondary use, given specific screening design guidelines. Currently, residential uses are prohibited on the ground floor and second story in much of the area, but perhaps this should be expanded to clearly address the entire CG zones. The Task Force is also recommending some modified site standards. In order to encourage larger lot sizes, one might study the concept of a minimum lot size. This would prevent existing parcels from being broken up into smaller lots that can become challenging to combine for redevelopment. While some property owners have created separate lots for pad developments, one might continue to allow this practice as part of a master plan. We are recommending three options for building heights according to the level of review. In the CG zones, the height limits currently stand at 35 (CG) and 45 (CG2) feet. At present, a conditional use permit process is required to go higher. This is typically considered to be a major hurdle for businesses and developers and may be deterring Highway 99 Task Force Review Memo October, 2005 Page 3 interested parties. Since we want new development on and adjacent to Highway 99, why not simplify things? Building heights could be set at 65 feet for both CG zones, and projects could be reviewed administratively using design guidelines. A second height option could allow projects up to 80 feet if a master plan is submitted for design review by the ADB. Currently, there is no height limit in the “Commercial Highrise” areas. This could remain a conditional use permit process. These site standard recommendations are summarized below: *Create guidance in design guidelines. Proposed Business Residential BR Zone Around the region, there are many examples of intensifying areas -- from mixed-use neighborhood-based districts (e.g. top of Queen Anne hill, Green Lake or Lake City in Seattle) to larger centers or "new downtowns" (e.g. Redmond Town Center, Mill Creek Town Center). The BR zone is supposed to share some concepts with these center-type developments, but also be unique to Edmonds and the opportunities available here (e.g. medical offices and clinics and care centers). Mid-rise mixed use development is growing in importance and success throughout the region. It makes a positive connection between the co-location of housing, jobs, and services. These proposals are in reaction to the problems of traffic, noise, crime and lack of open space that have been observed in the split between traditional, separated use areas that encourage sprawl on the one hand and over-concentration on the other. The Task Force reviewed the 2001 draft of the proposed BR Zone for the Medical Corridor, and is offering several considerations on uses and design. We also suggest that the City pursue true Transit Oriented Development by establishing a lower parking density requirement for the BR zone, thereby encouraging developers to market projects to transit commuters while minimizing traffic impacts to adjacent RS zones. Under uses, it would be good to clearly include restaurants under #5. Also, there appears to be some overlap between A.8 “primary and high schools” and C.7 “high schools” under uses requiring a conditional use permit. There are two uses that warrant further study as potential primary uses: laboratories and limited assembly of goods. • Laboratories Stevens Hospital is a major employer and community resource in the City of Edmonds. The Planning Board should work with hospital officials to consider medical-related uses’ impacts (positive and negative) on the hospital and medical community. Review Process Min lot area Min lot width Min side/ rear setback Max Height Max Floor Area Administrative (TBD) (TBD) 15* 65 none Master Plan w/ ADB Review (TBD) (TBD) 15* 80 none Conditional Use Permit (TBD) (TBD) * None in Highrise Nodes none Highway 99 Task Force Review Memo October, 2005 Page 4 • Limited assembly of goods With the limited assembly of goods, one may wish to consider limited food assembly/ manufacturing to include potential users such as an ice cream factory (i.e. Snoqualmie Ice Cream) or a microbrewery. Such users have had a difficult time locating in some existing business zones. One might allow such primary uses, but require them to have a retail component on site. Under primary uses requiring a conditional use permit, it would be simpler to label some of the facilities mentioned under #5 “cultural facilities”, which is categorized elsewhere in the code already. Again, there was a consensus at the Task Force to avoid the conditional use permit process where possible. Outdoor storage, for example, could be a simple secondary use adhering to specific design guidelines. Proposed Business Residential BR2 Zone Many of the comments above under BR apply here as well. As with BR, there is interest in design guidelines that will ensure buildings respect residential areas surrounding the BR and BR2 areas. This proposed zone is a perfect example of how and where Transit Oriented Development should be placed – adjacent services and transit corridors. Here again, in the BR2 zone a lower parking density requirement could be considered to encourage higher density consistent with Tranist Oriented Development while minimizing neighborhood traffic impacts. Neighborhood Recommendations While the primary goal of the Task Force is to further the economic development potential of Highway 99, we also acknowledge the neighborhoods’ desire to have new commercial and mixed-use development respect the smaller scale of surrounding residential uses. Especially with respect to the BR zones, design and uses should work contextually with surrounding single family residential zones. AM-655 12. Ordinance Regarding Condominium Conversions Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:11/06/2006 Submitted By:Duane Bowman, Development Services Time:15 Minutes Department:Development Services Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Discussion on proposed ordinance regarding condominium conversions. Previous Council Action The City Council was asked September 26, 2006 to look into this topic by a citizen who complained about the conversion of her apartment to a condominium. The matter was referred to the Community Services/Development Services Committee for review. The CS/DS Committee discussed the topic at their October 17, 2006 meeting and directed the City Attorney to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration of the City Council to impose limited conditions on condominium conversions. Narrative The City Attorney's office has prepared a memorandum (Exhibit 2) regarding the City's options for regulating condominium conversions. They are quite limited. RCW 64.34.440 spells out the special protections for tenants of apartment houses that are converted into condominiums. In addition, the City Attorney has also prepared two ordinances (Exhibits 3 & 4) for consideration by the Council. Only Seattle and Mercer Island have ordinances covering condominium conversions. Auburn and Issaquah repealed their ordinances. Exhibit 3 is a draft ordinance which would establish a requirement to pay $500.00 to low income families that would be forced to move out of their apartment. The relocation assistance (up to $500) to tenants and subtenants who elect not to purchase, would be provided to the tenant meets the statutory definition of a low-income household which is less than an amount equal to eighty percent of (i) the monthly median income for comparably sized households in the standard metropolitan statistical area, as defined and established by the United States department of housing and urban development, in which the condominium is located. Exhibit 4 is a draft ordinance requiring a warranty and relocation costs. The City would be responsible for inspecting the building and writing reports and doing follow-up inspections under this ordinance. Staff does not support this ordinance due to the additional staff time necessary to perform warranty inspections and the follow-up. This is more appropriately handled through private party purchase and sale agreements. Recommendation Should the Council decide to enact one of the proposed draft ordinances, staff supports the Should the Council decide to enact one of the proposed draft ordinances, staff supports the ordinance (Exhibit 3) which only establishes a requirement to pay relocation costs to qualified low-income households. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1 - CS DS Committee Minutes Link: Exhibit 2 - City Attorney Memo Link: Exhibit 3 - Draft Ord Condominium Conversion Relocation Costs Link: Exhibit 4 - Draft Ord Condominium Conversion Warranty Relocation Costs Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 08:52 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/01/2006 08:54 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/01/2006 01:52 PM APRV Form Started By: Duane Bowman Started On: 10/19/2006 02:46 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2006 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee October 17, 2006 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Michael Plunkett, Committee Chair Duane Bowman, Dev. Services Director Mauri Moore, Council Member Bio Park, City Attorney Rob Chave, Planning Manager Council member Moore convened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. Chairman Plunkett arrived shortly after the meeting started. A. Discussion on regarding conversion of rental apartments to condominiums. Duane Bowman, Development Services Director, introduced the topic. A number of residents from the unincorporated Esperance area attended and asked several questions regarding a large apartment complex, the Northwood Apartments, which is undergoing conversion to condominiums. Staff and the City Attorney responded to there questions. Council member Moore suggested that the residents contact their elected County Council representative, Gary Nelson. The residents thanked the committee and staff for the information. Mr. Park reviewed the State law governing condominium conversions. He noted that there is little the city can do regarding such conversions. He noted that the city can adopt an ordinance requiring a developer to provide a one year warranty on the conversion and we could also require $500 relocation costs for low-income tenants. He noted that presently only Seattle and Mercer Island require relocation costs. He also noted that two other cities had recently repealed their conversion ordinances. Council member Moore asked that Mr. Park research the reasons why they repealed the ordinances. The Committee asked the City Attorney to draft a proposed ordinance for consideration by the full Council at an upcoming meeting. ACTION: Directed City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the City Council imposing a warranty requirement and relocation costs to low income tenants. The Committee meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. {BFP645061.DOC;1/00006.900000/}A MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS NETWORK WITH INDEPENDENT MEMBER LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2100 • Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • 206.447.7000 • Fax: 206.447.0215 • Web: www.omwlaw.com MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 2006 TO: Community Development Services Committee City of Edmonds FROM: Bio F. Park, Office of the City Attorney RE: Condominium Conversion The Community Development Services Committee asked the office of the City Attorney to draft an ordinance of the City of Edmonds providing for such protections as permitted under RCW 64.34.440(6). Under this provision of the Condominium Act, municipalities can require apartment building owners who convert their buildings into condominiums to provide the following: 1. Relocation assistance of not more than $500 to low income tenants; and or 2. Notice of certain defect, repair and warranty to those who purchase units in a conversion condominium. The Council can adopt both the relocation and the repair/warranty provisions of the Act, or choose only one of the two provisions. (Draft of both ordinances are enclosed.) Please note that if the repair/warranty provision is adopted, staff time and cost should be considered because the City will be required to process applications and fees for inspections, perform code inspections of buildings subject to conversion, issue written reports of inspections, re-inspect repairs and re- issue written reports. See RCW 64.34.440(6)(a) through (d). In contrast, the ordinance providing only for relocation assistance has been drafted to be almost self enforcing. The ordinance would require the building owner to include information on eligibility for relocation assistance in the standard 90 day notice of conversion which is sent to all tenants and subtenants. The City would investigate and enforce the code only upon receiving complaints from affected tenants and subtenants. Community Development Services Committee October 31, 2006 Page 2 {BFP645061.DOC;1/00006.900000/} Seattle and Mercer Island codes provide for both the relocation assistance and repair/warranty provisions. Of note, however, is that Issaquah and Auburn repealed their ordinance providing for regulation of conversion condominiums. According to the Auburn City Attorney, the regulation was not used with any frequency. Furthermore, Auburn’s philosophy shifted in favor of home/property ownership, and the regulation was seen as an unnecessarily imposing obstacle to conversion of multi-family complexes to condominiums. Unlike Auburn, Issaquah repealed only the portion of its code providing for relocation assistance. This occurred just a few months after it was first adopted in 1993. Staff in Issaquah does not recall what prompted the Council to take such action. A review of the repealing ordinance and the minutes of meeting shed no light on the mystery. Issaquah’s reasons notwithstanding, in 1993 the Washington Supreme Court issued a decision declaring to be unconstitutional a state statute requiring mobile home park owners to provide relocation assistance to tenants when parks are closed or converted to another use. See Guimont v. Clarke, 121 Wn.2d 586, 854 P.2d 1 (1993). The Court found that the statute violated substantive due process because it was unduly oppressive to park owners. Id. Although the amount of relocation assistance per family required by the invalidated statute ($7,500) was substantially more than what could be required under an ordinance pursuant to the Condominium Act ($500), affected apartment owners facing the possibility of a large payout could challenge our ordinance in court under similar grounds. If they prevail, their remedy would be invalidation of the regulation. Id. Seattle and Mercer Island have yet to respond to our inquires as to whether such court challenge has ever been brought against them. In addition to the Condominium Act, the City could also adopt an ordinance requiring relocation assistance to be paid under the Residential Landlord Tenant Act “in partnership with the City.” The assistance would not only be limited to displaced low income tenants affected by condominium conversion, but also to those affected by demolition, substantial rehabilitation, or removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development. See RCW 59.18.440. It would apply to any residential landlord with an affected property. Under the statute, the relocation assistance could be as much as two thousand dollars per displaced low income tenant, of which at least half must be paid by the City. Id. Only the remaining portion would be the landlord’s responsibility. Id. Here, the City and the landlord would have to contribute equally in assisting displaced low income tenants. (As instructions were to draft an ordinance providing relocation assistance to low income tenants affected by condominium conversions, no draft of an ordinance for the above was prepared. If, however, the Committee would like one, our office will be happy to provide it.) BFP: 0006.900000 BFP/gjz 10/24/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING A NEW CHAPTER 19.95 ECDC CONVERSION CONDOMINIUM, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there has been a surge in conversions of apartment buildings to condominiums within the City limits; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such conversions present a hardship to low income tenants residing in affected apartment buildings who must relocate; and WHEREAS, Chapter 64.34 RCW sets forth requirements for apartment building owners converting apartments to condominiums; and WHEREAS, the same allows cities and counties to impose certain requirements with respect to condominium conversion within the jurisdiction of such cities and counties; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it would be in the public’s best interest to impose certain requirements with respect to condominium conversion within the City of Edmonds; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new chapter, Chapter 19.95 ECDC entitled “Conversion Condominiums,” is hereby added to Title 19 ECDC, building code to read as follows: CHAPTER 19.95 CONVERSION CONDOMINIUMS Sections: 19.95.010 Definitions 19.95.020 Relocation assistance. 19.95.030 Violations. 19.95.040 Civil penalty. 19.95.050 Enforcement. {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 19.95.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases used in this chapter shall have the meaning set forth in this section: A. "Condominium" means real property, portions of which are designated for separate ownership and the remainder of which is designated for common ownership solely by the owners of those portions. Real property is not a condominium unless the undivided interests in the common elements are vested in the unit owners, and unless a declaration and a survey map and plans have been recorded pursuant to this chapter. B. "Conversion condominium" means a condominium (a) that at any time before creation of the condominium was lawfully occupied wholly or partially by a tenant or subtenant for residential purposes pursuant to a rental agreement, oral or written, express or implied, for which the tenant or subtenant had not received the notice described in (b) of this subsection; or (b) that, at any time within twelve months before the conveyance of, or acceptance of an agreement to convey, any unit therein other than to a declarant or any affiliate of a declarant, was lawfully occupied wholly or partially by a residential tenant of a declarant or an affiliate of a declarant and such tenant was not notified in writing, prior to lawfully occupying a unit or executing a rental agreement, whichever event first occurs, that the unit was part of a condominium and subject to sale. "Conversion condominium" shall not include a condominium in which, before the effective date of the ordinance codified herein, any unit therein had been conveyed or been made subject to an agreement to convey to any transferee other than a declarant or an affiliate of a declarant. C. "Declarant" means any person who: 1. Executes as declarant the document, however denominated, that creates a condominium by setting forth the information required by RCW 64.34.216 and any amendments to that document; or 2. Reserves any special declarant right in the declaration; or 3. Exercises special declarant rights or to whom special declarant rights are transferred; or {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - 4. Is the owner of a fee interest in the real property which is subjected to the declaration at the time of the recording of an instrument pursuant to RCW 64.34.316 and who directly or through one or more affiliates is materially involved in the construction, marketing, or sale of units in the condominium created by the recording of the instrument; or 5. Undertakes to convert, sell, or offer for sale units in a conversion condominium. D. “Director” means the Development Services Director or his designee. E. “Notice of conversion” means the 90 day notice pursuant to RCW 64.34.440(1) required to be given by the declarant or his agent to residential tenants and subtenants in possession of a portion of a conversion condominium. F. “Person” means a natural person, corporation, partnership, limited partnership, trust, association, or other legal entity. G. “Tenant” or “subtenant” means any person who occupies and has a leasehold interest in a rental unit under a lawful rental agreement, whether oral or written, express or implied. H. “Unit” means a physical portion of the condominium designed for separate ownership, the boundaries of which are described pursuant to RCW 64.34.216(1)(d). 19.95.020 Relocation assistance. A. Declarant shall pay relocation assistance of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per unit to tenants and subtenants who elect not to purchase a unit and who are in lawful occupancy for residential purposes of a unit, and whose monthly household income from all sources, on the date of the notice of conversion, was less than an amount equal to eighty percent (80%) of the monthly median income for comparably sized households in the Seattle-Everett Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined and established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. B. The household size of a unit shall be based on the number of natural persons actually in lawful occupancy of the unit on the date of the notice of conversion. C. The tenant or subtenant actually in lawful occupancy of the unit shall be entitled to the relocation assistance. {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - D. Relocation assistance shall be paid on or before the date the tenant or subtenant vacates and shall be in addition to any damage deposit or other compensation or refund to which the tenant is otherwise entitled. Unpaid rent or other amounts owed by the tenant or subtenant to the landlord may be offset against the relocation assistance. E. Rights of tenants and subtenants set forth in the notice of conversion pursuant to RCW 64.34.440(1) must set forth tenants’ and subtenants’ right to relocation assistance as provided in this section. 19.95.030 Violations. It shall be a violation of this chapter for a declarant to fail or refuse to comply with the provisions of this chapter. Each tenant and subtenant who is subjected to a violation of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a separate violation. Each day of violation shall constitute a separate violation. 19.95.040 Civil penalty. Any person who fails or refuses to comply with the provisions or requirements of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per violation per day from the date that the violation is first committed until the declarant complies with the requirements of this chapter. 19.95.050 Enforcement. A. Tenants and subtenants subjected to violations of the provisions of this chapter, or their agents, may file a complaint with the Director. The Director is authorized and directed to receive complaints and conduct such investigations as are deemed necessary such as contacting declarants and seeking explanation for apparent violations. B. Whenever it is determined that there has been a violation of this chapter, the Director is authorized to pursue, at the Director’s discretion, enforcement of the code pursuant to provisions Chapter 20.110 ECDC. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING A NEW CHAPTER 19.95 ECDC CONVERSION CONDOMINIUM, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {BFP644562.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 6 - 0006.90000 BFP/gjz 10/24/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING A NEW CHAPTER RELATING TO CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION TO TITLE 19 ECDC; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there has been a surge in conversions of apartment buildings to condominiums within the city limits; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such conversions present a hardship to low income tenants residing in affected apartment buildings who must relocate; and WHEREAS, Chapter 64.34 RCW sets forth requirements for apartment building owners converting apartments to condominiums; and WHEREAS, the same allows cities and counties to impose certain requirements with respect to condominium conversion within the jurisdiction of such cities and counties; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it would be in the public’s best interest to impose certain requirements with respect to condominium conversion within the City of Edmonds; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new chapter, Chapter 19.95 ECDC entitled “Conversion Condominiums,” is hereby added to Title 19 ECDC, BUILDING CODE, to read as follows: CHAPTER 19.95 CONVERSION CONDOMINIUMS Sections: 19.95.010 Definitions. 19.95.020 Relocation assistance. 19.95.030 Code inspection. 19.95.040 Repairs. {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 19.95.050 Warranty. 19.95.060 Warranty fund. 19.95.070 Violations. 19.95.080 Civil penalty. 19.95.090 Enforcement. 19.95.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases used in this chapter shall have the meaning set forth in this section: A. “Association” means the unit owners' association organized under RCW 64.34.300. B. "Condominium" means real property, portions of which are designated for separate ownership and the remainder of which is designated for common ownership solely by the owners of those portions. Real property is not a condominium unless the undivided interests in the common elements are vested in the unit owners, and unless a declaration and a survey map and plans have been recorded pursuant to this chapter. C. "Conversion condominium" means a condominium (a) that at any time before creation of the condominium was lawfully occupied wholly or partially by a tenant or subtenant for residential purposes pursuant to a rental agreement, oral or written, express or implied, for which the tenant or subtenant had not received the notice described in (b) of this subsection; or (b) that, at any time within twelve months before the conveyance of, or acceptance of an agreement to convey, any unit therein other than to a declarant or any affiliate of a declarant, was lawfully occupied wholly or partially by a residential tenant of a declarant or an affiliate of a declarant and such tenant was not notified in writing, prior to lawfully occupying a unit or executing a rental agreement, whichever event first occurs, that the unit was part of a condominium and subject to sale. "Conversion condominium" shall not include a condominium in which, before the effective date of the ordinance codified herein, any unit therein had been conveyed or been made subject to an agreement to convey to any transferee other than a declarant or an affiliate of a declarant. D. “Conveyance” means any transfer of the ownership of a unit, including a transfer by deed or by real estate contract and, with respect to a unit in a leasehold condominium, a transfer by lease or assignment thereof, but shall not include transfer solely for security. {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - E. "Declarant" means any person who: 1. Executes as declarant the document, however denominated, that creates a condominium by setting forth the information required by RCW 64.34.216 and any amendments to that document; or 2. Reserves any special declarant right in the declaration; or 3. Exercises special declarant rights or to whom special declarant rights are transferred; or 4. Is the owner of a fee interest in the real property which is subjected to the declaration at the time of the recording of an instrument pursuant to RCW 64.34.316 and who directly or through one or more affiliates is materially involved in the construction, marketing, or sale of units in the condominium created by the recording of the instrument; or 5. Undertakes to convert, sell, or offer for sale units in a conversion condominium. F. “Director” means the Development Services Director or his designee. G. “Notice of conversion” means the 90 day notice pursuant to RCW 64.34.440(1) required to be given by the declarant or his agent to residential tenants and subtenants in possession of a portion of a conversion condominium. H. “Person” means a natural person, corporation, partnership, limited partnership, trust, association, or other legal entity. I. “Tenant” or “subtenant” means any person who occupies and has a leasehold interest in a rental unit under a lawful rental agreement, whether oral or written, express or implied. J. “Unit” means a physical portion of the condominium designed for separate ownership, the boundaries of which are described pursuant to RCW 64.34.216(1)(d). 19.95.020 Relocation assistance. A. Declarant shall pay relocation assistance of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per unit to tenants and subtenants who elect not to purchase a unit and who are in lawful occupancy for residential purposes of a unit, and whose monthly household income from all {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - sources, on the date of the notice of conversion, was less than an amount equal to eighty percent (80%) of the monthly median income for comparably sized households in the Seattle-Everett Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined and established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. B. The household size of a unit shall be based on the number of natural persons actually in lawful occupancy of the unit on the date of the notice of conversion. C. The tenant or subtenant actually in lawful occupancy of the unit shall be entitled to the relocation assistance. D. Relocation assistance shall be paid on or before the date the tenant or subtenant vacates and shall be in addition to any damage deposit or other compensation or refund to which the tenant is otherwise entitled. Unpaid rent or other amounts owed by the tenant or subtenant to the landlord may be offset against the relocation assistance. E. Rights of tenants and subtenants set forth in the notice of conversion pursuant to RCW 64.34.440(1) must set forth tenants’ and subtenants’ right to relocation assistance as provided in this section. 19.95.030 Code inspection. A. Prior to delivering a public offering statement, pursuant to Chapter 64.34 RCW, to a potential purchaser of a unit in a conversion condominium, declarant or his agent shall request, in writing, that the building department of the City of Edmonds perform a code compliance inspection of the building subject to conversion. B. Inspection shall be performed within forty-five days of the declarant’s written request, but not before applicable fees are paid by the declarant. Within fourteen days of the inspection, the building department shall issue written result thereof listing any violation of applicable City Code, which code is applicable regardless of whether the real property is owned as a condominium or in some other form of ownership. C. Fees for inspections shall be established by the City’s adopted schedule of charges. Fees may not exceed those that would be imposed for an identical inspection for a purpose different than complying with this section. {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - D. In addition to the statement required by RCW 64.34.415(1)(a), the public offering statement shall contain a copy of the written inspection report prepared by the building department of the City. E. This section shall not apply to any building for which a final certificate of occupancy has been issued by the City within the preceding twenty-four months. 19.95.040 Repairs. Prior to the conveyance of any residential unit within a conversion condominium, other than a conveyance to a declarant or affiliate of a declarant: A. Declarant shall repair all violations disclosed in the inspection report provided for in ECDC 19.95.030 that has not been waived by the City. B. Declarant shall obtain certification from the City that such repairs have been made, which certification shall be based on a reinspection to be made within seven days of the declarant's written request, but not before applicable fees are paid, and which certification shall be issued within seven days of said reinspection being made. 19.95.050 Warranty. In addition to any other warranty required by law, declarant shall warrant the repairs required to be made under ECDC 19.95.040 against defects due to workmanship or material for a period of one year following the completion of such repairs. 19.95.060 Warranty fund. Prior to the conveyance of any residential unit within a conversion condominium, other than a conveyance to a declarant or affiliate of a declarant: A. The declarant shall establish and maintain, during the one- year warranty period provided under ECDC 19.95.050, an escrow account containing a sum equal to ten percent of the actual cost of making the repairs required under ECDC 19.95.040. B. During the one-year warranty period, the funds in such account shall be used exclusively for paying the actual cost of making repairs required, or for otherwise satisfying claims made, under the warranty. Declarant shall notify in writing the {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 - association and the City as to the location of the account and any disbursements therefrom. C. Following the expiration of the one-year warranty period, any funds remaining in such account shall be immediately disbursed to the declarant. 19.95.070 Violations. It shall be a violation of this chapter for a declarant to fail or refuse to comply with any provision of this chapter. Each person who is subjected to a violation of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a separate violation. Each day of violation shall constitute a separate violation. 19.95.040 Civil penalty. Any person who fails or refuses to comply with the provisions or requirements of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per violation per day from the date that the violation is first committed until the declarant complies with the requirements of this chapter. 19.95.050 Enforcement. A. Persons subjected to violations of the provisions of this chapter, or their agents, may file a complaint with the Director. The Director is authorized and directed to receive complaints and conduct such investigations as are deemed necessary such as contacting declarants and seeking explanation for apparent violations. B. Whenever it is determined that there has been a violation of this chapter, the Director is authorized to pursue, at the Director’s discretion, enforcement of the code pursuant to provisions Chapter 20.110 ECDC. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 - five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING A NEW CHAPTER RELATING TO CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION TO TITLE 19 ECDC; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {BFP644584.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 8 -