The URL can be used to link to this page

2010.02.05 CC Retreat Agenda Packet AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RETREAT Special Meeting Location: South County Senior Center 220 Railroad Avenue, View Room Edmonds, Washington ______________________________________________________________ February 5 and 6, 2010 Friday, February 5, 2010 - Call to Order and Flag Salute 09:30 a.m. Public Comments (30 Minutes) 10:00 a.m. Council Retreat Session 1 Topic 1: Reports from City Departments, Boards, Commissions (30 Minutes) AM-2760 A. Public Works: Report on Waste Prevention, Recycling and Greenhouse Gas Reduction B. Police Department Report - The Year Ahead C. Economic Development Commission View AM-2787 Topic 2: Annual-Biannual Budget Structure and Outlook (30 Minutes) Topic 3: Annual Comprehensive Plan Structure and Schedule (30 Minutes) Packet Page 1 of 343 12:00 p.m. Working Lunch Location: Arnie's Restaurant 300 Admiral Way, Suite 211 Edmonds 01:30 p.m. Return to Senior Center ~ Council Retreat Session 2 Topic 1: Council Meetings/Procedures (30 Minutes) A. Duration B. Conduct AM-2764 C. Adoption and Use of Rules of Order AM-2765 D. Outside Council Committees AM-2788 E. Questions/Research Requests to Staff AM-2755 F. Public Service Announcements Topic 2: City Operations (30 Minutes) AM-2767 A. Review Legal Counsel Contract/Labor Negotiations AM-2772 B. Implementation of Ordinances after Passage by Council C. State Legislative Agenda: Misdemeanor Law Reform, Municipal Court/Police Savings D. Warrant Review AM-2775 E. Fire District One Contract Review F. Budget Format Options AM-2777 Topic 3: Economic Development (90 Minutes) A. Empty Office/Retail Space and Recruiting New Business B. Regional Partners to Maintain Jobs in the Area - Mukilteo, Everett, etc. C. Recommendations from the Economic Development Commission D. Green Marketing in the City E. Hire Grants Writer/Economic Development Consultant Packet Page 2 of 343 F. Olympics Tourism: too late? G. Outdoor Dining; Milltown Sidewalk/Restaurant Sidewalk/Parking Spaces H. Highway 99 Studies: Burke, Makers, Edmonds Green Plans, Piha Materials I. Broadband Installation AM-2774 Topic 4: General Funding and Levy/Infrastructure Funding and Bonds (45 Minutes) Saturday, February 6, 2010 - Call to Order and Flag Salute 09:00 a.m. Council Retreat Session 3 AM-2776 Topic 1: Waterfront (60 Minutes) A. Differences Between Current BC Zoning and the BD1 and BD2 Zones AM-2778 B. Vision Suggestions: Waterfront and City-wide Topic 2: Outer Neighborhoods (60 Minutes) A. Discussion on Development in the Outer Neighborhoods Topic 3: Sustainability - Next Steps (60 Minutes) AM-2789 A. Storm Water Runoff and System Upgrades; Reduce Pesticide Use, Community Outreach, Rain Garden Demo AM-2779 B. Implement Sustainable Purchasing Practices (i.e., best value vs. best price contract language); Green Power Purchase by City AM-2780 C. Green Buildings - Implement LEED Standards for New Construction, Incentivize Green Remodels, Other Code Rewrites D. Education and Communication; Website, Edmonds Green Logo, Speakers' Series, Local/Regional Partners AM-2781 E. Car Free Day, Parking Space Decommissioning, Electric Car Rally, Unlicense Day Packet Page 3 of 343 AM-2782 F. Styrofoam Ban AM-2783 G. Lighting Code/Dark Skies AM-2784 H. Tree Ordinance, Tree City, Public Tree/ Private Tree Preservation, Pedestrian Safety, Keep Healthy Trees, Address Real Dangers, Promote Green Reputation; Review Tree Plan Topic 4: Planning Issues (30 Minutes) A. Title 20: Possible Revisions B. Civic Playfield Negotiations C. Roof Design Zoning Ordinance Revisions D. Long Range Task Force Future AM-2751 Topic 5: Yost Pool Future Planning (30 Minutes) Topic 6: Revitalization of Senior Center/Future Planning (15 Minutes) ADJOURN Packet Page 4 of 343 AM-2760 Friday, Session 1, Topic 1, A. Public Works - Report on Waste Prevention, Recycling Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Kim Karas Submitted For:Steve Fisher Time: Department:Public Works Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title A. Public Works: Report on Waste Prevention, Recycling and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Recommendation from Mayor and Staff For information only. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is an outline of the information that will be presented at the Council Retreat. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Report on Waste Prevention, Recycling and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/27/2010 04:15 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/28/2010 08:44 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/28/2010 10:02 AM APRV Form Started By: Kim Karas Started On: 01/27/2010 11:58 AM Final Approval Date: 01/28/2010 Packet Page 5 of 343 Here is an outline of the information that will be presented at the Council Retreat: Background: • Coordinator position shared with Lynnwood through Interlocal Agreement; • Position funded with 75% match grant from Department of Ecology (same with Lynnwood); • Liaison with solid waste haulers – Allied Waste and Sound Disposal – and county solid waste staff; and • Snohomish County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) chair – last few years; representative for Edmonds–currently reviewing details of their solid waste comprehensive plan. Waste Prevention & Recycling Trends: • More organics collection and establishment of infrastructure; • Program outreach to commercial for organics collection; promotion of compost end product; • Electronics – E-Cycle Washington program; and • Product Stewardship initiatives – mercury lighting (fluorescents, etc.), prescription meds, and latex paint. Needs: • Continual funding for program; • More visible/updated web presence; and • Discussion of strengthening/updating recycling ordinance. Greenhouse Gas Reduction: • Inventory of community emissions – ICLEI model shows transportation and energy sectors as most intensive; • Although waste sector is small, the latest EPA report on materials management shows high emissions due to provision of goods, life cycle of products and packaging, waste diversion and recycling provides reductions; and • Climate Action Plan – largely created by community members; presented to Planning Board; there will be a presentation to Council to seek a resolution to adopt the Plan. Packet Page 6 of 343 AM-2787 Friday, Session 1, Topic 2: Annual-Biannual Budget Structure and Outlook Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Councilmember Buckshnis Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Topic 2: Annual-Biannual Budget Structure and Outlook (30 Minutes) Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Buckshnis rev Budget Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 12:00 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 02/01/2010 08:27 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 7 of 343 Packet Page 8 of 343 Packet Page 9 of 343 Packet Page 10 of 343 Packet Page 11 of 343 Packet Page 12 of 343 Packet Page 13 of 343 Packet Page 14 of 343 Packet Page 15 of 343 Packet Page 16 of 343 Packet Page 17 of 343 Packet Page 18 of 343 Packet Page 19 of 343 Packet Page 20 of 343 Packet Page 21 of 343 Packet Page 22 of 343 Packet Page 23 of 343 Packet Page 24 of 343 Packet Page 25 of 343 Packet Page 26 of 343 Packet Page 27 of 343 Packet Page 28 of 343 Packet Page 29 of 343 Packet Page 30 of 343 Packet Page 31 of 343 Packet Page 32 of 343 Packet Page 33 of 343 Packet Page 34 of 343 Packet Page 35 of 343 Packet Page 36 of 343 Packet Page 37 of 343 Packet Page 38 of 343 Packet Page 39 of 343 Packet Page 40 of 343 Packet Page 41 of 343 Packet Page 42 of 343 Packet Page 43 of 343 Packet Page 44 of 343 Packet Page 45 of 343 Packet Page 46 of 343 Packet Page 47 of 343 Packet Page 48 of 343 Packet Page 49 of 343 Packet Page 50 of 343 Packet Page 51 of 343 Packet Page 52 of 343 Packet Page 53 of 343 Packet Page 54 of 343 Packet Page 55 of 343 Packet Page 56 of 343 Packet Page 57 of 343 Packet Page 58 of 343 Packet Page 59 of 343 Packet Page 60 of 343 Packet Page 61 of 343 Packet Page 62 of 343 Packet Page 63 of 343 Packet Page 64 of 343 Packet Page 65 of 343 Packet Page 66 of 343 Packet Page 67 of 343 Packet Page 68 of 343 Packet Page 69 of 343 Packet Page 70 of 343 Packet Page 71 of 343 Packet Page 72 of 343 Packet Page 73 of 343 Packet Page 74 of 343 Packet Page 75 of 343 Packet Page 76 of 343 Packet Page 77 of 343 Packet Page 78 of 343 Packet Page 79 of 343 Packet Page 80 of 343 Packet Page 81 of 343 Packet Page 82 of 343 Packet Page 83 of 343 Packet Page 84 of 343 Packet Page 85 of 343 Packet Page 86 of 343 Packet Page 87 of 343 Packet Page 88 of 343 Packet Page 89 of 343 Packet Page 90 of 343 Packet Page 91 of 343 Packet Page 92 of 343 Packet Page 93 of 343 Packet Page 94 of 343 Packet Page 95 of 343 Packet Page 96 of 343 Packet Page 97 of 343 Packet Page 98 of 343 Packet Page 99 of 343 Packet Page 100 of 343 Packet Page 101 of 343 Packet Page 102 of 343 Packet Page 103 of 343 Packet Page 104 of 343 Packet Page 105 of 343 Packet Page 106 of 343 Packet Page 107 of 343 Packet Page 108 of 343 Packet Page 109 of 343 Packet Page 110 of 343 Packet Page 111 of 343 Packet Page 112 of 343 Packet Page 113 of 343 Packet Page 114 of 343 Packet Page 115 of 343 Packet Page 116 of 343 AM-2764 Friday, Session 2, Topic 1, C. Adoption and Use of Rules of Order Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title C. Adoption and Use of Rules of Order Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: AWC Rules of Order Link: Edmonds City Council Procedures Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 11:59 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/28/2010 11:04 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 117 of 343 Packet Page 118 of 343 Packet Page 119 of 343 Packet Page 120 of 343 Packet Page 121 of 343 Packet Page 122 of 343 Packet Page 123 of 343 Packet Page 124 of 343 Packet Page 125 of 343 Packet Page 126 of 343 Packet Page 127 of 343 Packet Page 128 of 343 Packet Page 129 of 343 Packet Page 130 of 343 Packet Page 131 of 343 Packet Page 132 of 343 Packet Page 133 of 343 Packet Page 134 of 343 Packet Page 135 of 343 Packet Page 136 of 343 Packet Page 137 of 343 Packet Page 138 of 343 Packet Page 139 of 343 Packet Page 140 of 343 Packet Page 141 of 343 Packet Page 142 of 343 Packet Page 143 of 343 Packet Page 144 of 343 Packet Page 145 of 343 Packet Page 146 of 343 Packet Page 147 of 343 Packet Page 148 of 343 Packet Page 149 of 343 Packet Page 150 of 343 Packet Page 151 of 343 Packet Page 152 of 343 Packet Page 153 of 343 Packet Page 154 of 343 Packet Page 155 of 343 Packet Page 156 of 343 Packet Page 157 of 343 Packet Page 158 of 343 Packet Page 159 of 343 Packet Page 160 of 343 Packet Page 161 of 343 Packet Page 162 of 343 Packet Page 163 of 343 Packet Page 164 of 343 AM-2765 Friday, Session 2, Topic 1, D. Outside Council Committees Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title D. Outside Council Committees Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Friday Session 2 Topic 1D Committee Appointment Link: Friday Session 2 Topic 1C Rules of Order order information Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 11:59 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/28/2010 11:10 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 165 of 343 C:\Documents and Settings\spellman\My Documents\WORDATA\Council Appointments\2010 FINAL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS 1-5-2010.doc EDMONDS CITY COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS 2010 CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES COM SERV/DEV SERV FINANCE PUBLIC SAFETY ORVIS PETERSON PLUNKETT POSITION #4 WILSON FRALEY-MONILLAS OTHER COUNCIL APPOINTED COMMITTEES COMMUNITY OUTREACH PLUNKETT FRALEY-MONILLAS COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CTAC) PLUNKETT WILSON COMMUNITY TRANSIT BERNHEIM DISABILITY BOARD PETERSON FRALEY-MONILLAS DOWNTOWN EDMONDS PARKING PLUNKETT FRALEY-MONILLAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WILSON PETERSON HIGHWAY 99 TASK FORCE PETERSON FRALEY-MONILLAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION PLUNKETT LAKE BALLINGER WORK GROUP WILSON LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE WILSON LONG-RANGE TASK FORCE PETERSON WILSON MUNICIPAL COURT REVIEW FRALEY-MONILLAS SNOCOM HAAKENSON COMPAAN WILSON (ALT) PFD OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE PETERSON PORT OF EDMONDS SEASHORE TRANSPORTATION FORUM 2010 SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT ORVIS SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOMORROW POSITION #4 FRALEY-MONILLAS (ALT.) SOUTH SNOHOMISH CITIES WILSON FRALEY-MONILLAS SALMON RECOVERY – WRIA 8 IN 2007 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRITCHARD OLSON MADE ALL COMMITTEES PAID COMMITTEES. Packet Page 166 of 343 ++ Advertise your legal services here Sponsored Content Buy New Quantity: 1 or Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering. or Amazon Prime Free Trial required. Sign up when you check out. Learn More Buy Used Used - Very Good See details $9.99 & eligible for FREE SuperSaver Shipping on orders over $25. Details Fulfilled by Amazon or Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering. Express Checkout with PayPhrase What's this? | Create PayPhrase More Buying Choices 92 used & new from $4.88 Have one to sell? Share with Friends Share your own customer images Search inside this book Start reading Robert's Rules of Order, Revised on your Kindle in under a minute . Don’t have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here. Hello, Stephen A Bernheim. We have recommendations for you. (Not Stephen?) Kindle: The #1 Bestseller on Amazon Stephen's Amazon.com | Today's Deals | Gifts & Wish Lists | Gift Cards Your Account | Help Search Books Advanced Search Browse Subjects New Releases Bestsellers The New York Times® Bestsellers Libros En Español Bargain Books Textbooks Robert's Rules of Order, Revised and over 400,000 other books are available for Amazon Kindle – Amazon’s new wireless reading device. Learn more Robert's Rules of Order (Newly Revised, 10th Edition) (Paperback) ~ Henry M. Robert III (Author), William J. Evans (Author), Daniel H. Honemann (Author), Thomas J. Balch (Author) "A deliberative assembly-the kind of gathering to which parliamentary law is generally understood to apply-has the following distinguishing characteristics: It is a group of people,..." (more) Key Phrases: standard descriptive characteristics , parish house, sample bylaws, Previous Question , Postpone Indefinitely, Standard Characteristic (more...) (87 customer reviews ) List Price:$18.00 Price:$12.24 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details You Save:$5.76 (32%) In Stock. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available. 41 new from $8.71 49 used from $4.88 2 collectible from $10.00 Frequently Bought Together Price For All Three: $30.74 Show availability and shipping details Legal Services in Seattle (What's this?) | Change Location Paralegal Certificates www.college-net.com/paralegal Complete your training in 14 weeks Learn to be a paralegal 100% online Provider: The College Network (Details ) | (2 reviews ) Ask A Lawyer Online JustAnswer.com/Law 19 Lawyers Are Online. Ask a Question, Get an Answer ASAP. Provider: JustAnswer (Details ) | (11 reviews ) › See all providers Shop All Departments Cart Your Lists Books Formats Amazon Price New from Used from Kindle Edition, March 7, 2009 $1.00 -- -- Library Binding, May 31, 1993 $9.95 $9.95 $6.49 Paperback, July 31, 1989 $4.99 $1.79 $0.01 Paperback, November 14, 2000 $12.24 $8.71 $4.88 Audio, Cassette, Abridged, Audiobook $18.96 $18.96 $24.94 Unknown Binding, December 31, 1972 ---- -- This item: Robert's Rules of Order (Newly Revised, 10th Edition) by Henry M. Robert Robert's Rules of Order in Brief: The Simple Outline of the Rules Most Often Needed at a Meeting, According to the Standard Authoritative Parliamentary Manual, Revised Edition by William J. Evans Robert's Rules for Dummies by C. Alan Jennings Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought Page 1 of 19 Robert's Rules of Order in Brief: The Sim... by William J. Evans (66 ) $6 95 Robert's Rules for Dummies by C. Alan Jennings (34 ) $11 55 Parliamentary Procedure (Quickstudy Reference... by Christian Ortiz (4) Back Next Packet Page 167 of 343 Henry M. Robert William J. Evans Sarah Corbin Robert Editorial Reviews Amazon.com Review Since Robert's Rules of Order first was published in 1896, it's been the means to orderly, smooth, and fairly conducted meetings. This ninth edition of the famous manual of parliamentary procedure includes everything from the first edition, but all of the information is clarified, cross-referenced, and carefully indexed. "Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty," said General Henry M. Robert, and his gift of order is as indispensable now as it was a century ago. --This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition. Review "A powerful brand name and an American classic." -- New York Times Book Review, 5/20/07 --This text refers to the Hardcover edition. See all Editorial Reviews Product Details Paperback: 704 pages Publisher: Da Capo Press; Tenth Edition edition (November 14, 2000) Language: English ISBN-10: 0738203076 ISBN-13: 978-0738203072 Product Dimensions: 6.5 x 4.3 x 1.5 inches Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies) Average Customer Review: (87 customer reviews ) Amazon.com Sales Rank: #2,770 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books ) Popular in these categories: (What's this?) #3 in Books > Reference > Etiquette > Rules of Order #14 in Books > Reference > Dictionaries & Thesauruses #42 in Books > Nonfiction > Law Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images ? More About the Authors Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more. Inside This Book (learn more) First Sentence: A deliberative assembly-the kind of gathering to which parliamentary law is generally understood to apply-has the following distinguishing characteristics: It is a group of people, having or assuming freedom to act in concert, meeting to determine, in full and free discussion, courses of action to be taken in the name of the entire group. Read the first page Key Phrases - Statistically Improbable Phrases (SIPs): (learn more ) standard descriptive characteristics , parish house, sample bylaws , adhering motions , incidental main motion, sidiary motions , next regular business session, original main motion, secondary amendment , primary amendment , quarterly time interval, counted rising vote, quasi committee, chair states the question, subsidiary motion, other main motion, undebatable motion, new service wing, debatable appeals , incidental motions , regular presiding officer , undebatable appeal , obtaining the floor, privileged motions , special order set Key Phrases - Capitalized Phrases (CAPs): (learn more) Previous Question, Postpone Indefinitely, Standard Characteristic, Fix the Time, Extend Limits of Debate, Resolutions Committee , Credentials Committee , Amend Something Previously Adopted, Program Committee , Madam President, Certain Time, Executive Board, Call of the House , Point of Information , Postpone Definitely , Convention Arrangements Committee , Recording Secretary , Division of the Assembly, Westfield Boulevard , Ernest Dunn, That the Parish Federation , Centennial Celebration , Finance Committee , Table of Rules Relating, Nominating Ballot New! Books on Related Topics | Concordance | Text Stats Browse Sample Pages: Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Index | Back Cover | Surprise Me! Search Inside This Book: Citations (learn more ) This book cites 4 books: Robert's Rules of Order: Newly Revised (10th Edition) by Henry M. Robert in Front Matter (1), Front Matter (2), and Front Matter (3) Robert's Rules of Order by General Henry M. Robert in Front Matter (1), Front Matter (2), and Front Matter (3) Manual of Parliamentary Practice by Thomas Jefferson in Front Matter (1), and Front Matter (2) The Declaration Of Independence by Sam Fink in Front Matter 10 books cite this book: The Law Of Florida Homeowners Associations: Single Family Subdivisions, Townhouse & Cluster Developments, Master Community Associations by Peter M. Dunbar on page Packet Page 168 of 343 Advertise on Amazon › Explore product tags Robert's Rules of Order in Brief by William J. Evans Discusses: standard descriptive characteristics secondary amendment counted rising vote Robert's Rules for Dummies by C. Alan Jennings Discusses: standard descriptive characteristics incidental main motion primary amendment The Complete Idiot's Guide to Robert's Rules by Nancy Sylvester Discusses: incidental main motion primary amendment original main motion Robert's Rules of Order by Henry Robert Discusses: undebatable motion undebatable appeal subsidiary motion 25, and page 26 Called to Be: A Spirit Odyssey by John P. Cock on page 236 Hazel Wolf: Fighting the Establishment by Susan Starbuck in Back Matter Robert's Rules of Order - Masonic Edition by Michael R Poll in Front Matter A Rant of Ravens (Birdwatcher's Mystery) by Christine Goff on page 27 See all 10 books citing this book Books on Related Topics (learn more) Customers Viewing This Page May Be Interested in These Sponsored Links (What's this?) 10th Edition at DealOz DealOz.com/Textbooks - Up to 97% Off! Compare 200 store in seconds. Any edition. Free Coupons. Great Gift Ideas www.Gifts.com - 100s of Roberts Rules Of Order 10th Edition Top Brands at Low Prices Textbooks - 10th-edition GetTextbooks.com - Quickly compare textbook prices Cheap textbooks in 101+ stores! See a problem with these advertisements? Let us know What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item? 79% buy the item featured on this page: Robert's Rules of Order (Newly Revised, 10th Edition) (87) $12.24 12% buy Robert's Rules of Order in Brief: The Simple Outline of the Rules Most Often Needed at a Meeting, According to the Standard Authoritative Parliamentary Manual, Revised Edition (66) $6.95 4% buy Robert's Rules for Dummies (34) $11.55 3% buy Parliamentary Procedure (Quickstudy Reference Guides - Academic) (4) $4.95 Explore similar items Tag this product (What's this?) Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product. Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. Search Products Tagged with Rate This Item to Improve Your Recommendations I own it Rate this item Packet Page 169 of 343 5 star: (59) 4 star: (19) 3 star: (4) 2 star: (1) 1 star: (4) Customer Reviews 87 Reviews Average Customer Review (87 customer reviews ) Share your thoughts with other customers: Most Helpful Customer Reviews 127 of 129 people found the following review helpful: The best book of its kind., June 9, 1999 By A Customer This review is from: Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (9th Edition) (Paperback) This is the one indispensable book to have at all of your meetings. In over 20 years of being a parliamentarian and 15 years as a teacher of Rules of Order, I have not found a better reference. If you're just learning, you might want to get a simpler, abridged version as a primer - just to let you know what is most important. It won't be long, however, before you'll want this book to use as a real tool to help meetings run more efficiently, in a shorter period of time and with a minimum of disagreements. It will also help you with those "problem" people at meetings. If you don't know Rules of Order you're at the mercy of those who do, or more often, those who pretend to. Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this ) 130 of 134 people found the following review helpful: The real Robert's: the authority on parliamentary procedure , December 21, 2001 By Brian Melendez (Minneapolis, MN United States) - See all my reviews As a lawyer, when I am asked about proper procedure at a meeting, my first question is: What rules do you use? Is there an applicable statute, or bylaws or rules that the organization has adopted? Nine times out of ten, the answer is: "Robert's Rules of Order." Robert's is the most widely used parliamentary manual in the United States. General Henry M. Robert published the original "Robert's Rules" in 1875 and 1876 and, since the copyright on that edition (and the next few editions) has long since expired, there are numerous unofficial editions on the market. The third edition, published in 1893, is still marketed in paperback by more than one publisher as the "original" Robert's Rules. With the copyright expired, even the name "Robert's" has passed into the public domain, and many imitators have slapped the name "Robert's" on books of parliamentary procedure that bear minimal relation to General Robert's work (much as many dictionaries claim the name "Webster's" without any connection to Noah Webster or the Merriam-Webster brand that carries on his work). This book is the real Robert's, composed by an editorial board appointed by General Robert's heirs (including his descendants Sarah and Henry III, both eminent parliamentarians). Now in its tenth edition, published in 2000, this book "supersedes all previous editions and is intended automatically become the parliamentary authority in organizations whose bylaws prescribe 'Robert's Rules of Order' . . . or the like, without specifying a particular edition." Robert's is not necessarily the best parliamentary manual on the market: "Modern Parliamentary Procedure" by Ray Keesey is far more logical and user-friendly, and "The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure" by Alice Sturgis (commissioned by the American Institute of Parliamentarians as a contemporary alternative to Robert's) is more readable and more rooted in modern practice. But no other book has gained as much as a toehold in Robert's dominance in the market. If you are interested in parliamentary procedure, or figuring out how most organizations work in the twenty-first-century United States, this Robert's is indispensable. Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this ) 43 of 45 people found the following review helpful: Totally comprehensive , July 15, 2000 By A Customer This review is from: Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (9th Edition) (Hardcover) I first came into contact with this book during the summer between my freshman and sophomore years of high school. I was going to be participating in something called Student Congress in the fall, and although I had never heard of it before, all of my teachers and teamates told me to get a copy of Robert's Rules. Not knowing of any of the "watered down" versions that existed, I simply purchased the official copy. Having cut my teeth on that copy (dutifully reading the entire book that summer) I have little sympathy for people who shy away from it because it's too complicated :-) But honestly, this book has become a source of pride to me. Although I have been criticized for perhaps too zealously insisting on adhering to the rules in the book, I am also accepted as a Parliamentary expert and some have remarked I know more than the Parliamentarians who run our exercise (although I would be loathe to admit that, they are very intelligent people). Anyway, given a proper forum Robert's Rules of Order have been a very rewarding thing for me, as they have given me something to study and learn and be recognized at, and I intend on buying all future editions of the text to make sure I stay on top of any developments. Truly the best book of its kind! Comment | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this ) Ad feedback Most Recent Customer Reviews So-so for legislators-N.G. for board members (Audio Version) Hopefully someone will produce an audio version for common folks who just want to learn more about Robert's Rules of Order as they volunteer as a director on a not-for-profit... Read more Published 21 days ago by Integrity Trainer Kindel Version Difficult To Use The Kindle edition is very poorly constructed, no way to jump from table of contents (or index) to the applicable page, it appears to be merely a text rendering. Read more Published 1 month ago by Kevin Buck What the Bible says about Angels I have had this book for over a month already, have written one doctrine paper with its assistance, and have discussed its contents in multiple conversations. Read more Published 1 month ago by Kirjan Lukija Updated "Robert's Rules of Order" I've been active in local organizations and politics for over 60 years. Generally serve as chairman or parlimentarian and have always instisted that "Robert's Rules of Order" be... Read more Published 3 months ago by J. D. Davis Robert's Rules Rules This book is a MUST for any one on a board or committee or running a meeting. We own a Condo and are on the board and some standing committees. Read more Published 4 months ago by T. Sacco Excellent This hard-copy of Robert's Rules of Order was maintained well. I received the book in a timely manner and the appearance of the book was like new. Published 4 months ago by Crystal L. Jones Great advice for the Club Secretary When a bit of formality is required to run a meeting it is always good to know the rules and be able to quote a reliable source The more we read the more knowledge we gain and we... Read more Published 4 months ago by Ralph E. Dixon Excellent Service Regarding my order for 'Roberts Rule of Order' book. Received the book promptly and in good condition. Thanks for your excellent service. Packet Page 170 of 343 Share your thoughts with other customers: › See all 87 customer reviews... Published 4 months ago by Proud Vet Robert's Rules of Order revised 10th edition This revised edition is best yet. It is easily understood. It is more detailed as far as giving directions to conducting meetings. The organizational planning is great. Read more Published 10 months ago by L. Ebert Robert's Rules of Order: Newly Revised (10th Edition) This is a very well written book, although at time to be a bit wordy, but it serves the purpose. Published 10 months ago by William V. Langfitt, Jr. Search Customer Reviews Only search this product's reviews › See all 87 customer reviews... Customer Discussions New! See all customer communities, and bookmark your communities to keep track of them. Listmania! So You'd Like to... Product Information from the Amapedia Community Beta (What's this?) Be the first person to add an article about this item at Amapedia.com. › See featured Amapedia.com articles Look for Similar Items by Category Books > Law Books > Reference > Dictionaries & Thesauruses Books > Reference > Etiquette > Rules of Order Look for Similar Items by Subject Search Books by subject: Reference England Wales Reference / General Rules of Order General Institutions & learned societies: general Parliamentary & legislative practice Reference works Parliamentary practice Law, Citizenship & Rights i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND ... Ad feedback Feedback If you need help or have a question for Customer Service, contact us . Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images ? Is there any other feedback you would like to provide? Click here Packet Page 171 of 343 Get to Know Us Careers Investor Relations Press Releases Amazon and Our Planet Make Money with Us Sell on Amazon Join Associates Self-publish with Us › See all Let Us Help You Shipping Rates & Policies Amazon Prime Returns Help Canada | China | France | Germany | Japan | United Kingdom And don't forget: Amazon Windowshop | AmazonWireless | Askville | Audible | DPReview | Endless | IMDb | Shopbop | SoundUnwound | Warehouse Deals by Amazon | Zappos Conditions of Use | Privacy Notice © 1996-2010, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates Your Recent History (What's this?) Packet Page 172 of 343 AM-2788 Friday, Session 2, Topic 1, E. Questions/Research Requests to Staff Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title E. Questions/Research Requests to Staff Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Fri Session 2 - Topic 1E Requests to Staff Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 12:00 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 02/01/2010 08:49 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 173 of 343 Packet Page 174 of 343 AM-2755 Friday, Session 2, Topic 1, F. Public Service Announcements Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Councilman Michael Plunkett Time: Department:City Council Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title F. Public Service Announcements Recommendation from Mayor and Staff This is a request from Councilman Michael Plunkett. Previous Council Action This was endorsed on 8/5/2008 by a 6-1 vote of Council and utilized for the rest of 2008. In January of 2009 Council President Wilson encouraged and Council accepted changing to a business presentation in place of Community Service Announcement. Narrative Councilman Plunkett has placed this on the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Memo from Councilman Plunkett July 11, 2009 2) Minutes Aug. 5, 2009 3) Resolution No. 1179 4) New Resolution Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Attach 1: Memo from Councilman Plunkett Link: Attach 2 CM 8-5-08 Link: Attach 3: Reso #1179 Link: Attach 4 New Reso Re CSA Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/27/2010 04:15 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/28/2010 08:44 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/28/2010 10:02 AM APRV Packet Page 175 of 343 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/28/2010 10:02 AM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/25/2010 02:27 PM Final Approval Date: 01/28/2010 Packet Page 176 of 343 City of Edmonds MEMORANDUM Date: July 11, 2008 To: Councilmembers From: Michael Plunkett, Council President Subject: Chamber of Commerce Public Service Announcements An issue and an idea continue to come up. Several great local organizations ask for time at Council meetings to make public service announcements. Most recently the Chamber has asked to be put first on agendas for about ten announcements over the rest of the year. Complying with this request would be a violation of existing council policy for order on agenda and, in general, would not be fair to other organizations. I was elected Council President to uphold Council policy and to administer it fairly and openly. I may have a solution for your consideration. This kind of issue comes up all the time. I have spend time speaking to some folks about this before. So here is what I’m going to do. I will put on each agenda a five minute Public Service Announcement item at the start of each meeting. This way the opportunity to make a PSA will be equitable for all and avoids just setting aside time for one organization when there many worthy organizations. Hence, to make this an equitable situation for all those who meet the criteria (see Mr. Clifton’s policy for existing criteria for PSA); I am going to allow a five-minute segment at the beginning of the agenda for public service announcements. In the beginning, I would like to do this on a trial basis; and if it presents too many difficulties or the Council is not on board with this, we can rethink it. But I would like to give all the worthy organizations an opportunity. Now I know there maybe some details to work out but why not give it a try and see how it works. Thanks for your consideration. C: Mayor Haakenson Stephen Clifton, Director CS/ED Sandy Chase, City Clerk Attachment 1 COUNCIL OFFICE L:\Productiondb\AGENDA\CCOUNCIL\0015_2755_Public Service Announcements 7-11-08.doc Packet Page 177 of 343 Packet Page 178 of 343 Packet Page 179 of 343 Packet Page 180 of 343 Packet Page 181 of 343 Packet Page 182 of 343 Packet Page 183 of 343 Packet Page 184 of 343 Packet Page 185 of 343 Packet Page 186 of 343 Packet Page 187 of 343 AM-2767 Friday, Session 2, Topic 2, A. Review Legal Counsel Contract/Labor Negotiations Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title A. Review Legal Counsel Contract/Labor Negotiations Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Friday Session Topic 2A Rev Leg Counsel Contract Link: Fri Sess Topic 2 A Labor Negotiations Link: 2010 Council Retreat\Labor Relations Consultants Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 11:59 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/28/2010 11:39 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 188 of 343 Packet Page 189 of 343 Packet Page 190 of 343 Packet Page 191 of 343 Packet Page 192 of 343 Packet Page 193 of 343 LABOR RELATIONS CONSULTANTS The following agencies/individuals are consultants who negotiate labor contracts and represent public employers in arbitrations and other labor relations matters. Please note that inclusion on this list does not signify an endorsement or recommendation by AWC. You should contact the individual firms for more complete information and references. Allied Employers Randy Zeiler, Yvonne Richardson 4030 Lake Washington Blvd NE Suite 201 Kirkland, WA 98033-7870 Phone: (425) 576-1100 Allied@AlliedEmployers.org Braun Consulting Group Robert R. Braun 1326 5th Avenue, Suite 339 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 623-5155 b.braun@Braunconsulting.com Bullard Smith Jernstedt Harnish Akin Blitz 1000 SW Broadway Suite 1900 Portland, OR 97205 Phone: (503) 248-1134 ablitz@bullardlaw.com Cabot Dow & Associates Cabot Dow, President PO Box 1806 Bellevue, WA 98009 cabotdow@aol.com Phone: (206) 453-1986 Dionne & Rorick James Dionne 601 Union St. Ste. 900 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 622-0203 Fax: (206) 223-2003 jim@dionne-rorick.com Foster & Associates Chuck Foster 3797 Fort Bellingham Road Bellingham, WA 98225 Phone: (360) 671-5707 Garvey Schubert & Barer Ron Knox 1191 2nd Avenue, 18th Floor Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 816-1356 rknox@gsblaw.com James L. Hobbs Labor Relations Service James L. Hobbs 17583 S. Skyridge Drive Mount Vernon, WA 98274 Phone: (360) 424-1695 Keithly Weed Graafstra & Benson Grant K. Weed 21 Avenue A Snohomish, WA 98290 Phone: (360) 586-3119 information@snohomishlaw.com Menke Jackson Beyer Elofson Tony Menke 807 N 39th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 Phone: (509) 575-0313 tmenke@mjbe.com Ogden Murphy Wallace (Seattle Office) Doug Albright 1601 Fifth Avenue #2100 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 447-7000 dalbright@omwlaw.com Ogden Murphy Wallace (Wenatchee) Chuck Zimmerman, Gil Sparks PO Box 1606 Wenatchee, WA 98807 Phone: (509) 662-1954 gsparks@omwlaw.com Perkins Coie Michael Reynvaan 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 583-8469 reynm@perkinscoie.com Puget Sound Public Employers Mike Meglemre PO Box 4160 Spanaway, WA 98387 Phone: (253) 846-8868 Just-say-no@Comcast.net Packet Page 194 of 343 RJS & Associates Richard J. Sokolowski 522 Runquist Court Steilacoom, WA 98388 Phone: (360) 584-0117 dcsoko@comcast.net Clients: Battleground, Puyallup Sound Employment Solutions LLP Janice Corbin, Janet May 11700 Mukilteo Speedway/PMB 1211 Mukilteo, WA 98275 Phone: (206) 334-5003 sescorbin@msn.com Strickler & Associates Howard Strickler 2865 Mt Rainier Dr S Seattle, WA 98144 Phone: (206) 722-3719 hstrick@serv.net Summit Law Group Bruce Schroeder, Otto Klein, Rod Younker 315 Fifth Avenue S, Suite 1000 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 676-7000 bruces@summitlaw.com The Wesley Group Kevin Wesley PO Box 7164 Kennewick, WA 99336 Phone: (509) 735-6075 Clients: Cities of Kennewick, Othello, Clarkston. Packet Page 195 of 343 AM-2772 Friday Session 2, Topic 2, B. Implementation of Ordinances after Passage by Council Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title B. Implementation of Ordinances after Passage by Council Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Fri Sess 2 Topic 2B Ord Implementation Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:25 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:38 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 08:27 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 196 of 343 Packet Page 197 of 343 Packet Page 198 of 343 AM-2775 Friday, Session 2, Topic 2, E. Fire District One Contract Review Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title E. Fire District One Contract Review Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Friday Session 2 Topic 2E Fire Sale account Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:25 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:38 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 08:59 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 199 of 343 Retreat Agenda Memo City of Edmonds City Councilman Steve Bernheim February 1, 2010 Re: Disposition of Proceeds from Sale of Fire Equipment to Fire District 1 I propose that the proceeds from the sale of the fire department equipment to Fire District 1 be placed in a designated, segregated, interest-bearing account (interest accruing in the account, that is) and reserved for such future purposes as the Council shall direct. Unless formal action on this matter can be taken at the Retreat, I would propose it for the agenda of the City Council meeting on February 16, 2010. Steve Bernheim Edmonds City Council # 6 http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/cp6.stm 512 Bell St. Edmonds WA 98020 Council Office Hours: after 4:30 p.m. 425-744-3021 (desk/message) 425 712 8418 (fax) 206 240 5344 (cell) council@stevebernheim.com Packet Page 200 of 343 AM-2777 Friday, Session 2, Topic 3: Economic Development Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Topic 3: Economic Development (90 Minutes) Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Friday Session 2 - Topic 3 Economic Development Link: Combined 2009 Annual Reports from the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:13 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 09:28 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 201 of 343 City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 City of Edmonds Economic Development Plan Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 Website: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us December, 2006 Packet Page 202 of 343 City of Edmonds Economic Development Element Adopted December 19, 2006 Packet Page 203 of 343 Edmonds Economic Development Comprehensive Plan Element The purpose of the Economic Development Element is to state the city’s economic development policies clearly in one place, thereby guiding local policymakers and informing the public about issues relating to the local economy. The chapter is divided three major sections: Introduction and Approaches to Economic Development, The Edmonds Economy, and Economic Development Goals and Policies. I. Introduction and Approaches to Economic Development A. Why do economic development? Economic development in Edmonds can be defined as “the city’s policies and services for growing the local economy in order to enhance the quality of life”. Economic development is essential to preserving the existing level of service and attaining long-range goals for sustainable growth and community vitality. In general, economic development affects the local economy by broadening and strengthening the local tax base and by providing meaningful employment and entrepreneurial opportunities. An increasing number of communities around the region have economic development policies and staff. Community economic development priorities vary widely, but may include: creating affordable housing, adding employment, downtown or commercial revitalization, small business assistance, business recruitment and site selection help, community marketing, historic preservation, tourism generation, public relations, streamlining permit processes, and special development or streetscape projects (including public art). Communities are realizing that there is no such thing as a “static” or fixed economy; local economies are always changing. They are also impacted by countless forces: national and state economic cycles, competition from surrounding cities for desirable businesses, local and regional land use changes, residential and commercial real estate market trends, and other forces. Without change and adaptability, a community can become stagnant or even decline. Successful communities today acknowledge their past and allow a vision for the future to guide them through the changes needed to prosper. 1 Packet Page 204 of 343 B. Past economic development efforts and local stakeholders The Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development was formed in 1995 as a coalition of businesspeople and property owners to promote the city and recruit businesses. It undertook analysis, strategic planning, and projects through 2004. In 1996, the City of Edmonds, the Port of Edmonds, and the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce crafted the “Edmonds Economic Development Strategic Action Plan”, which was adopted by reference. This element updates and replaces that work. The city’s economic development efforts continued to focus primarily on the downtown, and in 1999, downtown economic development specialists Hyett-Palma were selected for a downtown study. The study, Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy – 1999, outlined several strategies for dealing with economic development in downtown Edmonds. They noted that the future of downtown Edmonds should not be “boiled down to an either or decision”, but instead Hyett-Palma identified the challenge for downtown as follows: “Keep Downtown “the same” — by maintaining its charm, quaintness, and small town ambiance — while at the same time managing change in a way that allows Edmonds to take advantage of economic opportunities that will benefit the community.” 1 They concluded that avoiding change will, in fact, not keep downtown “the same”. That will only result in a downtown that will not stay the same or flourish to be more attractive.2 They also identified several recommended actions, such as: • Reserving the first floor, by city zoning ordinance, in a downtown core specialty cluster for retail; • Developing a large number of housing units in the downtown through mixed-use developments; • Adding design guidelines; • Helping existing businesses to expand and open additional ventures; and • Ensuring that aesthetics add to the downtown ambiance through high quality public and private signage, art and streetscape elements. 1 Hyett Palma. Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy. P. 11 2 Hyett Palma. Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy. P. 12 2 Packet Page 205 of 343 Many of the Hyett Palma conclusions resurfaced during a 2004-2005 Downtown Plan Comprehensive Plan Update, for which additional study was completed by Heartland LLC and by Mark Hinshaw at LMN Architects. In 2004, the City also added the first Economic Development Director on staff under the Mayor. This position works in close collaboration with local and regional economic development stakeholders. Prior to the development of the Economic Development Element, initial staff priorities were set involving: business recruitment and retention, tourism development, creating a more business-friendly regulatory environment, and addressing barriers to development in business districts around the entire city. This Economic Development Element will provide further guidance for staff and council on economic development priorities. C. Current national thinking in economic development Across the country, many past economic development efforts focused either on providing major tax breaks to entice large corporations or on government provision of significant infrastructure projects geared towards assisting industry. Today’s general outlook on economic development recommends a more balanced approach with an emphasis on long-term planning for a vital, sustainable community. Support locally-owned businesses States and municipalities are increasingly establishing policies to bolster smaller, locally-owned businesses. Economic development expert Michael Shuman, an economist and attorney, focuses on creating self-reliant communities. In his book “Going Local”, Shuman highlights ways in which municipalities can bolster locally-owned companies and increase local spending. Recent research has begun to highlight the positive “multiplier effect” associated with prioritizing the growth of local companies. The multiplier effect describes how the expenditure of a dollar generates more than a dollar of activity. A worker who receives a check might spend a portion of it at a local restaurant or shop, thereby resulting in more transactions within that community. The local multiplier effect stops when the transaction leaves the local community. Shuman writes, “The primary virtue of import substitution, community corporations, and local investment is that these strategies increase the likelihood of the economic multiplier’s staying at home.”3 3 Shuman, Michael. Going Local. P. 50 3 Packet Page 206 of 343 While it is impossible today to substitute many of our “imports” locally, many improvements are achievable. Some examples of common practices in line with this school of thought include procurement policies that favor local companies (if within a range of price competitiveness) and “shop local” programs. Create vibrant places Another movement in economic development has produced a shift towards creating vibrant places where today’s workforce will want to live, as documented by public policy and economic development expert Richard Florida. Florida’s research demonstrates how today’s “creative class” of workers choose location first, and employment second. In this line of thinking, corporations are increasingly forced to locate to where the desirable, educated workforce resides, not necessarily whichever locale offers the largest tax break. In the following segment, Florida describes what today’s workforce seeks in a place to live. ”What’s there: the combination of the built environment and the natural environment; a proper setting for pursuit of creative lives Who’s there: the diverse kinds of people, interacting and providing cues that anyone can plug into and make life in that community What’s going on: the vibrancy of the street life, café culture, arts, music, and people engaging in outdoor activities – altogether a lot of active, exciting creative endeavors”4 4 Florida, Richard. The Rise of the Creative Class, p.232 4 Packet Page 207 of 343 Consequently, municipalities and regions engaged in economic development must think about nurturing environments for businesses and people in order to grow a local economy. II. The Edmonds Economy A. Analysis of local economy A good understanding of the local economy helps a community to effectively guide policies, investments, staff resources, and future plans. The analysis completed for the Economic Development Element offers a background on local business characteristics and a summary of city revenues. Local business characteristics Edmonds is home primarily to a small business economy. In 2005, City records counted 1,791 licensed businesses located in Edmonds. Claritas consumer research, which provides detailed information not collected locally, recorded 1,526 businesses. Some summary employment statistics are listed below. Table 1: Median # of employees: 3 Average # of employees: 8 Total employees: 12,693 Source: Claritas While most Edmonds businesses employ a small number of workers, larger local employers include Stevens Hospital, the Edmonds School District, and the City of Edmonds. Stevens Hospital, with 217 beds and 888 full-time employees, serves as an anchor to the greater health care industry in Edmonds. In 2005, there were 209 related health care and social assistance businesses. Edmonds is also home to a large number of retail and professional service businesses, ranging from small shops and restaurants to nationally-known architectural, engineering and technical firms. Table 2 shows the number of Edmonds businesses by NAIC code. 5 Packet Page 208 of 343 Table: 2 Number of Businesses in Edmonds by NAIC Code in 2005 NAIC Business Description Code Count Retail 44-45 231 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 54 229 Health Care and Social Assistance 62 209 Other Services (except Public Administration)81 172 Construction 23 114 Finance & Insurance 52 107 Accommodation and Food Services 72 102 Real Estate & Rental Leasing 53 72 Administrative, Support & Waste Management & Remediation Svs 56 58 Wholesale Trade 42 53 Educational Services 61 41 Manufacturing 31-33 33 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 71 29 Public Administration 92 21 Transportation and Warehousing 48-49 18 Information 51 18 Utilities 22 2 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 11 2 NAICs Total 1,511 All businesses in Edmonds 1,526 *15 businesses were non-classifiable Source: Claritas North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) replaced the U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system. Edmonds is also home to many businesses in fields that are experiencing dramatic growth in self-employment across the nation. Nationally, the number of businesses with no paid employees grew from 17.6 million in 2002 to more than 18.6 million in 2003, a growth rate of 5.7 percent, according to a report issued by the U.S. Census Bureau. This represents the biggest rate of increase in self-employment since the Census Bureau began releasing such statistics in 1997. If Edmonds is indeed experiencing the same trend locally, it may be part of the reason why Edmonds has a relatively high percent of workers who live and work within Edmonds. According to the 2000 Census, 18.5% of Edmonds’ working population chose to live and work in Edmonds. Comparatively, that figure was only 10.8% for Lake Forest Park, 15.1% for Mukilteo, 9% for Mountlake Terrace and 12.8% for Mill Creek. Perhaps due to its large amount of commercially zoned land and therefore number of businesses, 23.4% of Lynwood’s workers worked and lived within the city. 6 Packet Page 209 of 343 New business development in Edmonds will likely continue to be dominated by small businesses and self-employed persons, unless significant land use changes are made to encourage the development of larger office buildings or other commercial uses. Geographically, employment is currently spread throughout the city’s downtown, neighborhood business districts and along Highway 99. 7 Packet Page 210 of 343 City revenues & sustainability Each year, budget season arrives and usually some difficult choices are made about what to fund and what to cut. Throughout the year, land use decisions are also made, according to staff reports, regulations, public testimony, and other factors. Rarely do we stop to consider the bigger picture: the linkage between each year’s budgetary constraints and the ongoing land use decisions. This connection affects the revenues generated, the services the city is able to offer, and the quality of life enjoyed by residents and businesses. Services Quality of Life Revenues Edmonds is heavily reliant on taxes as a source of General Fund income. In 2005, roughly 73% of General Fund revenues were generated from three tax sources: property, sales, and utility. While this dependence on taxes is not new, one percent property tax limitations on local governments have acted as a major fiscal drain in largely residential communities such as Edmonds. In conformity with I-747, Edmonds is limited to a one percent annual property tax increase. Prior to I-747, property taxes could rise up to six percent annually. This has led Edmonds and many other municipalities to pursue economic development agendas to diversify their revenue base, including but not limited to increasing sales taxes. The city receives sales tax from two main sources: the sale of consumer goods and construction materials. Sales tax revenues vary from city to city, depending on commercial development patterns, construction activity and other factors. In Bothell, for example, sales tax is the city’s largest revenue source. In Lynnwood, it accounts for 46% of general fund revenues. In Edmonds, it accounts for roughly 19.3 % of the General Fund. A table with sample cities and their sales tax revenues is listed 8 Packet Page 211 of 343 below. The per capita sales tax generated is also included, although a more detailed analysis would need to be done to determine how much of the sales tax revenue is generated by local residents versus visitors. It is simple to state the goal of increasing sales tax revenues, but somewhat more complex when determining how to implement that goal. Many cities have focused on development because of its positive impact on sales and property taxes. Quality development/ redevelopment increases: • Property values, resulting in additional property tax revenues. • Construction activity, which subsequently adds sales tax revenues. • The number of utility customers, resulting in higher consumption and additional utility tax revenues.5 Because Edmonds is largely built out, emphasis in the business districts should be on redevelopment, where appropriate. This does not imply a need for “wholesale” redevelopment of entire districts, but rather an emphasis on realizing growth around important but limited opportunities, such as the Harbor Square and Edmonds Shopping Center areas. On a smaller scale, the recent closure of a gas station at 5th Avenue South and Dayton Street presents an opportunity to close the gap between neighboring uses and encourage pedestrian linkages. Moreover, increased mixed-use development would also benefit the city because “more density equals more customers”, as Hyett Palma pointed out in 1999.6 Table 3: Selected Mid-Size and Small Cities 2005 Population Sales Taxes Per Capita Shoreline 52,740 $ 6,016,940 114$ Kirkland 45,800 $ 14,309,796 312$ Edmonds 39,620 $ 4,746,814 120$ Lynnwood 34,540 $ 17,419,531 504$ Bothell 30,930 $ 8,885,688 287$ Mountlake Terrace 20,390 $ 1,360,097 67$ Mukilteo 19,220 $ 1,814,520 94$ Arlington 14,700 $ 3,683,440 251$ Snohomish 8,585 $ 2,383,186 278$ Port Townsend 8,535 $ 1,591,514 186$ Source: WA State Dept. of Revenue 5 City of Bothell budget revenue narrative 6 Hyett Palma. Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy. P. 16 9 Packet Page 212 of 343 The strategy of encouraging redevelopment in all of the business districts falls in line with the geographic distribution of business revenues around the city. Downtown, successful restaurants and retailers occupy many of the ground level commercial units. In the neighborhood business districts, grocery stores, drug stores and convenience retail dominate. On Highway 99, larger “box” retailers, car dealerships, and restaurants bring in substantial revenues. It is important to recognize the significance of the city’s boundaries and commercial districts in and directly adjacent to the city. In the past, Edmonds was given the opportunity to annex large neighboring commercial areas such as the Aurora Village and James Village shopping center developments. In hindsight, this would have been a wise decision from a revenue perspective. While a recent annexation effort in the Esperence section of Snohomish County failed, there may be property owners interested in annexing by petition, such as along Highway 99. This would increase continuity to an important commercial area with complex municipal boundaries. Another consideration pertaining to sales tax generation involves the level of “leakage” in consumer spending, or in other words, what local residents purchase outside of Edmonds. As part of the Berk & Associates consultant study performed for the Highway 99 Task Force in 2004, consumer spending in the collective trade area of Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace was analyzed. They found that residents in the Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace areas combined spend roughly $550 million in other cities each year on retail items (all retail, excluding autos and groceries). 7 While consumer spending patterns are influenced by national economic trends, local municipalities can nonetheless work to address compatible areas of spending leakage. A 1999 survey conducted by Hyett Palma of primary trade area residents found that people chose to come downtown primarily for eating in the restaurants and shopping. The needs of special consumption categories such as these should help guide corresponding recruitment and land use policies in order to maximize the effectiveness of efforts to recapture local spending dollars. For example, design guidelines should ensure that first floor commercial units in the downtown and throughout the city are able to physically accommodate restaurant and retail uses. Parking regulations can further “make or break” a retail and dining district. 7 Edmonds Highway 99 Enhancements Market Assessment, 10-04, page vi 10 Packet Page 213 of 343 In 1999, only 5% of the consumer survey respondents reported to come downtown for entertainment 8 . However, a modest “nightlife” might help attract young professionals, a conclusion drawn by Hyett Palma as well. The arts have a vital role to play; evening “artwalks” and performing arts events are significant draws. Creating business districts with activity into the evening can add a critical mass of potential consumers during the time of the day when Americans spend most of their money. In turn, this might encourage local retailers to stay open later. B. Important regional trends A major regional economic development agenda has been developed by collaboration through the Puget Sound Regional Council. “The Prosperity Partnership” identifies strengths and weaknesses in the Puget Sound economy, and calls for specific “foundation initiatives”: education, technology commercialization, new and small business support, social capital and quality of life, tax structure, and transportation. Edmonds staff and council members have attended meetings of “The Prosperity Partnership”, as Edmonds residents and businesses could clearly benefit from progress in several of these foundation initiatives. While regional efforts continue, many cities around the region are undertaking ambitious economic development projects, from new town centers to transit oriented developments (TOD). These projects typically contain a mix of retail, office and residential uses. For example, Kent Station is a 470,000 square foot retail, entertainment, education, office, and residential project located along the Sounder commuter rail line. The City of Kent had an active role in the development of this project by purchasing property, implementing necessary zoning and land use changes, and soliciting developers. 8 Hyett Palma. Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy. 11 Packet Page 214 of 343 C. Developments in neighboring cities Nearby, several major developments will likely affect the Edmonds economy by providing additional consumer options and more competition for businesses. In addition to the actual amenities offered at these locations, sophisticated “branding” and marketing campaigns accompany many of today’s center developments. In 2005, Lynnwood’s Alderwood Mall added a “lifestyle village”, an outdoor shopping area that features upscale stores and dining options. The streetscape setting mimics older, authentic downtowns, such as Edmonds, and represents a widespread trend in mall development today. Lynnwood is also planning to take on significant additional density, and has a 20-year plan for a City Center. Buildings in the entire City Center area would house retail businesses, offices and homes, with heights up to 26 stories or 350 feet. Most of the property is privately held. The city will buy the land for the parks and a promenade, and then allow the zoning and market forces to drive development. Just south of Edmonds, the Aurora Corridor Project is the City of Shoreline’s plan to redesign and redevelop the three miles of Aurora Avenue North (State Route 99) that run through Shoreline. The goal of the plan is to improve pedestrian and vehicle safety, pedestrian and disabled access, vehicular capacity, traffic flow, transit speed and reliability, nighttime visibility and safety, storm water quality, economic investment potential and streetscape amenities. While in an immediate sense, it may result in the dislocation of some businesses, in the long term it will likely result in more center-oriented development and the aggregation of small parcels. While not immediately adjacent to Edmonds, the Mill Creek Town Center has proved to be a significant draw to businesses and consumers from the Edmonds area. The Mill Creek Town Center Plan was initiated by the City in 1993 to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan for a new mixed-use center in the City’s central core area. The Town Center provides for multi-storied buildings, strategically placed pedestrian plazas and parking facilities organized around a new street pattern that provides connections to adjacent neighborhoods and the existing commercial core. Today, several hundred thousand feet of retail and office space have been constructed, with anchor tenants such as Central Market and the University Book Store. 12 Packet Page 215 of 343 III. Economic Development Goals and Policies A. Edmonds’ current strengths, weaknesses and opportunities (SWOT) relating to economic development In preparation of considering the goals and policies for economic development in Edmonds, a SWOT analysis was used as a planning tool to provide direction. Strengths { Picturesque waterfront community { Identifiable neighborhoods and business centers { Mass transit { Downtown specialty retailers and food establishments { Events and festivals { Historic buildings { Reputation as an arts community { Stevens Hospital { International business community { Strong social capital/ community pride { Generally low rates of unemployment and poverty Weaknesses { Limited trade area due to waterfront location { State B&O tax structure implications on small business communities { Land use and parking regulations in the business districts { Multiple property owners and small lots in commercial areas outside the downtown BC zone Opportunities { Use location and “character” to leverage additional economic development, nurturing and recruiting locally-owned, unique businesses to enhance our advantage. { Build on the existing transit hub and future Edmonds Crossing multi- modal station with transit-oriented development. 13 Packet Page 216 of 343 { Maximize the impact of the Edmonds Center for the Arts by developing the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor, by linking it to Main Street shops and restaurants. { Leverage telecommunication/ technology assets to provide better service for customers and new revenue sources for the city. { Plan and implement improvements in regulation around the business districts. Threats { Lifestyle villages and new town centers in nearby cities { Wider variety of housing options and more commercial space elsewhere { Lack of design guidelines/ regulations to protect quality first floor commercial space { Business recruiters from other cities targeting Edmonds businesses. { Lack of a long-term vision for sustaining or improving the Edmonds quality of life with projected revenues. B. Goals and Policies Goal: 1. Foster a healthy business community that provides employment and other economic opportunities. Policies 1a. Promote a results-oriented permit and licensing process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. 1b. Develop or maintain business recruitment programs, and create a tool box of incentives to encourage retail and other commercial development. 1c. Encourage and expand business expansion and retention programs. 1d. Develop a local purchasing policy that gives prioritizes doing business with locally-owned companies, if within a range of price competitiveness. 1e. Consider public relations tools to increase awareness of the local business community, such as annual small business awards. 14 Packet Page 217 of 343 1f. Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community. Goal: 2. Revitalize the city’s business districts, balancing redevelopment, preservation and the need for consumer amenities. Policies 2a. Adopt land use policies, zoning, and design guidelines that are supportive of responsible economic development. 2b. Strengthen neighborhood business centers through community planning and commercial revitalization, resulting in new regulations that will spur development. 2c. Revise parking requirements, especially downtown, to encourage business development. 2d. Develop land use regulations that will encourage Transit Oriented Development (T.O.D.) in the Harbor Square and “Old Safeway” area. 2e. Explore options such as Business Improvement Districts/ Areas (special assessment districts) as a way to help shopping areas fund marketing and beautification in a sustainable fashion. 2f. Continue to support an historic preservation program that works to identify and preserve historic architectural, archeological and cultural resources for future generations. 2g. Utilize incentives and the historic preservation building code to encourage property owners to register eligible historic buildings. 2h. Work to identify and “brand” distinct business districts, where there is a natural synergy, such as the Highway 99 International District, the Stevens Hospital Medical Corridor, and the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor. 2i. Create synergy for commercial businesses where possible, for example, by implementing a “retail core” area in the downtown. 2j. Provide a quality environment with character for patrons and residents to enjoy. 15 Packet Page 218 of 343 Goal 3. Diversify the tax base and increase revenues to support local services. Policies 3a. Address barriers to redevelopment in the business districts, and encourage mixed-use development. 3b. Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to pursue new revenue streams. 3c. Implement regulations and/or design guidelines that will ensure the development of quality retail and commercial space that can physically accommodate a variety of future users. 3d. Focus recruitment and “buy local” community marketing on consumer spending segments in which there is significant “leakage”, and also a strong possibility of recapturing spending. 3e. Pursue private and public grant or sponsorship funding for programs, where possible. 3f. Encourage longer hours of business operation and/or more evening uses in the business districts to add options during “peak” hours of consumer spending. 3g. Expand tourism efforts to take advantage of regional trends, such as nature tourism. Goal 4. Strengthen the quality of life and vitality of the community for residents, workers and visitors to enjoy. Policies 4a. Develop a housing strategy that plans for a variety of housing options, both in design and affordability, around the city. Consider housing options for artists. 4b. Promote the visitor/tourism sector. Sustain and develop facilities that attract tourists, conferences, professional training, sporting events and other recreational opportunities. 16 Packet Page 219 of 343 4c. Consider building incentives that may encourage environmentally-friendly construction (or LEED certified), a percent set-aside for the arts, public spaces, and affordable housing. 4d. Provide leadership on technology issues in order to ensure that Edmonds residents and businesses have fast, affordable service. 4e. Foster an open and accepting community culture that respects diversity. 4f. Expand social, cultural, artistic, recreational and other learning activities for all generations. 4g. Strive to improve communications with the public. 17 Packet Page 220 of 343 C. Implementation The policies in this document were constructed to provide a supportive foundation for future economic development projects, legislation and decisions. Implementing the city’s policies will require cooperative involvement on the part of the City Council, Mayor, commissions and boards, committees, and staff. In the past, several studies have recommended a number of strategies for implementation, and yet few of these recommendations have actually been realized. At the same time, the city’s long term financial outlook has only worsened. It is therefore imperative that real progress be made in setting the course for economic development in Edmonds. Phased implementation could be achieved through a series of legislative actions and ongoing administrative services. Legislative The City Council ultimately decides on many land use and other regulations that greatly affect the ability for economic development to take place. As the policy-making body, the City Council must also act in the best interest for Edmonds residents and businesses today - and far into the future. This involves balancing immediate community feedback, the results of expert studies, staff recommendations, and the need for long term vision and planning for Edmonds’ future financial picture and quality of life. In the spring of 2006, the City Council formed an Economic Development Committee, which acts as the liaison between the City Council and the Economic Development Director. The Committee works to ensure that the Council as a whole has a deeper understanding of the economic development issues facing the City. As described in this Economic Development Element, a great deal of economic development involves “setting the stage” for economic growth to occur in a way that will enhance the community. Currently, a number of studies and community planning efforts are either underway or were recently completed that recommend revisions to various zoning regulations. Below are the short term implementation action items for the City Council. • Adopt design guidelines that ensure quality commercial space; • Resolve downtown zoning and height regulations consistent with an expressed vision; 18 Packet Page 221 of 343 • Approve recommended reforms stemming from the work of the Highway 99 Task Force; • Study and approve updated Comprehensive Plan language and zoning regulations for the neighborhood business districts; • Study and adopt a package of incentives for use in business recruitment and retention efforts; and • Adopt a local purchasing policy, setting a priority for doing business with local companies, if within a specified range of price competitiveness. Services While staffing at the City of Edmonds has been streamlined significantly due to budgetary constraints in recent years, the city also recognizes that economic development contributes positively to the revenue outlook, local employment, and the quality of life for residents. The city should provide adequate resources for the following services to implement economic development in Edmonds: • Long-range planning for commercial areas • Site selection assistance and business recruitment • Community marketing • Business expansion and retention efforts • Public relations involving economic development • Data collection and analysis In cooperation with the city, the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce is also involved in economic development through a special subcommittee and the many festivals and business networking services that contribute positively to the local economy. Where relevant, the City of Edmonds should work in collaboration with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, local economic development stakeholders, and regional alliances to further the economic development policies outlined in this Economic Development Element. 19 Packet Page 222 of 343 COMBINED 2009 ANNUAL REPORTS FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND PLANNING BOARD The City of Edmonds Economic Development Commission and Planning Board, in response to their charge to prepare and submit an annual report, respectfully submit this report to the Edmonds City Council and Mayor Haakenson for review and consideration. Packet Page 223 of 343 The Citizens Economic Development Commission On April 21, 2009, the Edmonds City Council passed Resolution 1198 which directed City of Edmonds staff to create an Ordinance, where if approved, would create a Citizens Economic Development Commission. On June 2, 2009, the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3735, which amended the Edmonds City Code, Title 10, adding a new Chapter 10.75 Citizens Economic Development Commission. The Citizens Economic Development Commission, consisting of 17 members, is empowered to advise and make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, and as appropriate to the Planning Board, Architectural Design Board or other Boards or Commissions of the City on such matters as may be specifically referred to the Commission by the Mayor or City Council including but not limited to 1) determining new strategies for economic development within the City of Edmonds, and 2) identifying new sources of revenue for consideration by the City Council, and other strategies for improving commercial viability and tourism development. Packet Page 224 of 343 Executive Summary A significant challenge for the City of Edmonds is a long-term structural gap in which revenue growth is slower than growth in expenses. The City of Edmonds will experience a budget deficit that is projected to begin in 2013. Without increases in the City’s revenues, taxes will have to be raised, which can potentially put excessive burdens on individual household budgets. In an effort to find solutions to this problem, the Edmonds Citizens Economic Development Commission (CEDC) and Planning Board hereby submit several initial proposals that should be worked on and completed in 2010. The problem will require a multi-faceted approach; as no single proposed strategy, policy, or program can assure success for our community or fix the problem. All proposals should therefore be viewed as only one piece of an overall economic development program. The proposals lie in the areas of improved land use, attracting new businesses and supporting existing businesses, and development of tourism. These approaches are also intended to support residential development in certain areas and support existing property values. All of these undertakings can be worked on simultaneously during the year. The Edmonds CEDC and Planning Board requests that the City Council provide feedback shortly after its February 2010 retreat on the following recommended items. 1. Ensure that the City’s economic development position can devote full time to economic development activities and adequately fund proposed programs and activities. A focus of this role is to continue to define and promote Edmonds’ brand. 2. Commit to developing/reviewing/updating a strategic plan every year, ideally corresponding to the City Council’s annual retreat; this includes setting goals and continually assessing progress metrics. 3. Initiate Neighborhood Business Center plans for Five Corners (Neighborhood Center) and Westgate (Neighborhood Community Center) in order to position these areas to attract redevelopment. 4. Support the process to redevelop Harbor Square with public involvement that ensures a balance between generating revenue and addressing environmental concerns. . 5. Initiate and fund a business/marketing plan for the City-owned fiber optic network. 6. Develop a community vision that addresses a balance between quality of life and growth objectives while furthering Edmonds’ “green” initiatives. The Edmonds Economic Development Commission and Planning Board encourage the City Council to actively work in partnership with the Edmonds CEDC and participate in its meetings. City leadership needs to focus on, and prioritize, major efforts/initiatives that effect the overall business community and quality of life for residents as a whole as opposed to focusing time, energy, and money on less significant issues. It is time act now, i.e., initiate, not react. Packet Page 225 of 343 What is the problem? The City of Edmonds projects that annual revenues will fall below expenses in the year 2013 and that the shortfall will increase well into the future. Reserves, including about $900,000 from the Fire District 1 transaction, will push out the first appearance of a general fund deficit until 2013. The chart below presents the annual deficit as well as the cumulative deficit projected through 2020. By 2020 Edmonds is projecting a cumulative deficit of $30 million. Edmonds Budget -35000000 -30000000 -25000000 -20000000 -15000000 -10000000 -5000000 0 5000000 Ending Balance Cum Year by Year Ending Balance Cum 3026674 2388064 1244080 -402124 -2633035 -5291777 -8634408 -12711862.3 -17565434.8 -23238284 -29775508.7 Year by Year -402124 -2230911 -2658742 -3342631 -4077454.29 -4853572.54 -5672849.13 -6537224.73 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 What does this deficit mean to City of Edmonds residents? There will need to be either large cuts in basic services provided by the City or large increases in taxes paid to the City. On average an Edmonds household now pays about $800 annually in property taxes that go to support the City (property taxes are also collected for other purposes such as the Library District, Emergency Medical Services, Schools, Port, Hospital District, etc.). The chart below demonstrates the average increase in property taxes that each household would need to pay to cover the projected deficit. By the year 2020 the average household will need to pay an additional $374, a 46% increase over today. This equates to a cumulative total of $1,701 in additional taxes from 2013 to 2020. This assessment only takes into account maintaining services at current levels and does not include additional taxes associated with needed transportation improvements or additional amenities such as upgrading Yost Pool. Tax Increase Per Household 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Tax Increase Tax Increase 22.978514 127.48063 151.92811 191.00749 232.99739 277.347 324.16281 373.5557 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Packet Page 226 of 343 Why is economic development important to Edmonds? Financial stability is of paramount importance to the City because it allows for the successful delivery of services with an eye on the long-term financial ramifications of decisions, particularly given the budget challenges of the past and those projected into the future. Prudent financial decisions can help determine future opportunity and should result in citizens receiving the best possible government for their tax dollar. The City’s economic prosperity and development increases wealth and the standard of living for many who live and work within the City of Edmonds. The structure of the City’s economy influences the City’s physical development and determines the City’s capacity to fund essential services. These factors also support existing residential property values that are important components of City revenue, as well as personal wealth. Aside from a national or global economic recession, the Citizens of Edmonds deserve predictability and reliability regarding the government services they fund. A strong economy requires a strong, healthy and balanced community as a foundation. Thus, it is imperative that the City of Edmonds position itself to plan for and maintain economic sustainability. Economic development is a program, a group of policies or activities that seek to improve the economic well being and quality of life for a community, and it includes numerous approaches as no single strategy, policy, or program can assure success for a community. It strives to find balance and synergy between business and residential development that is consistent with quality of life concerns of the citizenry. As stated within the City of Edmonds Economic Development Plan, “Communities like Edmonds are realizing that there is no such thing as a ‘static’ or fixed economy; local economies are always changing. They are also impacted by countless forces, such as national and state economic cycles, competition from surrounding cities for desirable businesses, local and regional land use changes, residential and commercial real estate market trends, and other forces. Without change and adaptability, a community can become stagnant or even decline. Successful communities today acknowledge their past and allow a vision for the future to guide them through the changes needed to prosper.” An increasing number of communities around the region have economic development policies and staff. Their community economic development priorities vary widely, but can include, initiatives to create affordable housing; adding employment; downtown or commercial revitalization; small business assistance, business recruitment and site selection; community marketing, branding and promotions; tourism generation; streamlining permit processes; and streetscape projects (includes public art). What are other cities doing to address the problem? Edmonds is not alone in facing economic distress in the near future. The CEDC studied what other neighboring cities and entities are doing to address similar issues. During two joint meetings with the Planning Board, representatives from the Snohomish County Economic Development Council, the cities of Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Bothell, and the Port of Edmonds shared information about recent economic development related efforts/initiatives. Packet Page 227 of 343 The Citizens Economic Development Commission and Planning Board collectively agree that one strong message presented from the guest speakers is that success in the area of economic development requires strong and steady leadership from the City Council, and alignment of goals and visions amongst all who impact the situation. Additional messages from guest speakers included the following:  City staff and Council must work closely together, and in support of common goals  Open community involvement and input is critical to the success of the process  Public policy is weighed against its impact to economic development  A positive corporate culture is what encourages collaboration and innovation  Processes and regulations must be aligned with goals  Zoning is to be designed to proactively attract new business  Economic development goals are kept highly visible and tracked for progress and completion  Community branding is critical  A City must present and participate in regional forums  Partnerships between the City and other entities, groups, businesses and organizations are needed in order to move forward in a productive manner  Compliment, don't compete with other communities  Sustaining a razors edge focus on achieving the end goal. What has Edmonds been doing? Edmonds has not been idle in recent years either. The community college has been growing and adapting its curriculum to the challenges of the future and has increased its presence in Edmonds, as illustrated by the downtown Conference Center. The Highway 99 Task Force continues to progress. Stevens Hospital is showing positive growth and will enter into a new relationship with Swedish Medical Center that will better prepare it to meet future needs. The council has approved a contract rezone for Firdale Village. The Port has purchased buildings within its office park and begun the process of developing a master plan for the area. Various agencies, including Sound Transit, WSDOT and Community Transit, have initiated and continue to pursue transit improvements on Highway 99 and within the downtown area, providing opportunities for further transit-oriented development. Both public and private initiatives have substantially expanded community access to high-speed fiber optic technology. The City’s Economic Development Department has improved outreach to the business community and increased promotion of Edmonds via advertising in many types of publications in addition to contacting PCC and Ace Hardware to encourage their locating within Edmonds. The City acquired funding for a highway enhancements project now in process to create a visual gateway in Edmonds’ International District on Highway 99, and the City completed first phase planning for the downtown 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor. All of these and more represent opportunities for the City of Edmonds to begin to solve its budget problems. Packet Page 228 of 343 What is the Edmonds CEDC Doing? After six months of meeting as a body and in subgroups, in addition to gathering information from the county, port, and neighboring cities, the Edmonds CEDC has some initial proposals and ideas we believe help prioritize the aspects the City should begin working on immediately. The Edmonds CEDC cannot stress enough the importance of taking action and initiating programs now. Actions taken by the City in 2010 could take years before they manifest into projects and programs that generate revenue. The City needs to grow its population in a well-planned and sustainable manner. Total revenues from property taxes need to increase without putting excessive burdens on individual households. We need to increase revenues from a variety of sources, not just property taxes. All of these proposals take time, so we must start now because 2013 is just around the corner. Below we describe the most important proposals/ideas that we recommend the City Council initiate in 2010. We will continue to look for more solutions in 2010 and will work on the ideas that City Council requests the Commission address in greater detail. 1. Find a way for the City’s economic development position to devote full time efforts to economic development activities and adequately fund proposed programs and activities. Funds could come, for example, from the Fire District 1 transaction. The priorities of the economic development position should include branding the City to increase tourism; identifying what is unique about Edmonds that attracts people (tourists and new residents) so we can build on those strengths; attracting new businesses and jobs to the City; working with large landowners to overcome the principal barriers to attracting large, quality, clean businesses to Edmonds. The Economic Development Director will also be charged with continually monitoring progress metrics and identifying hurdles to such, especially that which may require council action in a timely manner. 2. The City Council should commit to developing/reviewing/updating a strategic plan every year (and throughout the year, when necessary and appropriate), ideally corresponding to their annual retreat. The City should consider using the services of a skilled strategic planning facilitator to work with the community to develop a vision and strategic plan with active citizen participation. A City of the quality of Edmonds should move forward with a defined strategy. An overarching plan is needed. In addition, that plan needs to be revisited every year to see where the City stands, what has been accomplished and what should be modified. The plan needs to include indicators of achievement. It must involve the citizens in a meaningful way. There are a number of examples of successful strategic planning from our neighbors. There are even funds available to help cities in the process. 3. The City of Edmonds needs to initiate master planning and rezoning for the Neighborhood Business Centers to more easily enable redevelopment and attract innovative and progressive builders. The City should start with Five Corners (Neighborhood Center) and Westgate (Neighborhood Community Center). Neighboring cities are already doing this, and Edmonds will be left out if we are not ready to compete. Developers will choose to develop a site that has appropriate zoning in place rather than risk waiting years for a legislative process to conclude. The City recently approved changes to the Firdale Village zoning regulations, although the process was privately sponsored and ended up being excessively long and complicated. Nonetheless, the rezone was accomplished, and the City can use Packet Page 229 of 343 lessons learned from this process to develop a more streamlined process for the other neighborhood centers. Additional areas needing continued attention include the ESCA-Skippers-DOT area west of SR 104 (see item 4), Stevens Hospital (medical center area) and Highway 99 corridor, and Perrinville. Because of the confluence of events and potential public resources available, the City should initiate, and/or work with WSDOT on, a master planning process for the ESCA-Skippers-DOT area west of SR-104. This area presents a unique opportunity for the City to “set the stage” for future public/private partnerships and transit-oriented development opportunities that could significantly enhance the entire downtown area while furthering its economic development needs. Much planning has been done over the years in this area; it is time to put the vision, regulations and infrastructure in place to “get it done.” 4. The City should support the process that the Port of Edmonds has begun to redevelop Harbor Square. The process will involve significant public involvement and should ensure a balance between generating revenue and addressing environmental concerns. 5. The City also has an opportunity to position itself so as to attract businesses that wish to utilize the City’s fiber optics. The City Council should work with the Economic Development and Finance Departments’ efforts to prepare and fund a business/marketing plan related to the City’s ability to utilize its fiber optic system. 6. The City should develop a community vision. Community involvement is essential to assuring the quality of life in Edmonds while furthering Edmonds’ “green” initiatives. In addition, we increase the probability of successful redevelopment of neighborhood centers if the redevelopment responds to the needs of the residents of the neighborhood. We need to develop a vision for the City as a whole, as well as its individual neighborhoods and their centers. What does the Commission need from the City Council? The Commission is made up of 17 members of the community who are donating a great deal of time to this effort because of its importance to the future of the City we love. We have all seen too many reports left to collect dust on a shelf. We want to have our work taken seriously and support the City Council in its economic development efforts. Time is of the essence. To ensure that the remainder of Edmonds CEDC’s tenure is as productive and constructive as possible, it is imperative that the Edmonds CEDC receive confirmation from the City Council that the Edmonds CEDC is moving in the right direction. We agree that it’s important and necessary for the City Council to review the Edmonds CEDC and Planning Board Combined Reports and give us feedback following the February 5 and 6, 2010 Council retreat. More specifically, we request feedback by February 17, 2010 (Edmonds February CEDC Meeting) and ask that the City Council attend this meeting to share your thoughts regarding, and reactions to, our proposals and efforts. Packet Page 230 of 343 The Commission is unanimous in agreeing that we need the City Council to work with us on economic development efforts and initiatives, and that our work, ideas and recommendations receive prompt attention for the City Council. We request that the City Council also appoint two members, not currently serving as members of the City Council Economic Development Committee, to participate actively on the Commission and carry back to the full Council our concerns. This will result in four City Council members having ongoing involvement in economic development efforts and activities. Most of all, City leadership needs to focus on, and prioritize, major efforts/initiatives that effect the overall business community and quality of life for residents as a whole. It is time to act now, that is initiate, not react. Summary We consider this report interim in nature. The attached appendices contain information on a variety of issues, ideas, potential recommendations and discussions that have been explored to date. All potential recommendations under each charge of Ordinance 3735 will be further discussed/explored/examined by the Economic Development Commission and Planning Board in 2010 upon acceptance and further direction by the City Council. The Edmonds EDC and Planning Board commit to continue working towards addressing the important charges contained within Ordinance 3735 and we look forward to our tasks at hand. Packet Page 231 of 343 APPENDIX AND PLANNING BOARD ATTACHMENTS Packet Page 232 of 343 Appendix 1 Edmonds Economic Development Commission Charges Contained Within Ordinance 3735 1. Determining new strategies for economic development within the City of Edmonds The City has an opportunity to position itself so as to attract businesses that wish to utilize the City’s fiber optics. For example: o Support the City’s efforts to prepare a business plan related to the City’s ability to utilize its fiber optic system. This is needed before any decisions can be made as to how best to move forward.  Locally-based business program - Develop a broad-based plan to encourage local businesses. For example: o Use and promote available fiber optic networks to encourage 'clean' businesses and home- based telecommuting business start-ups. o Extend the idea to encourage local incubator businesses (selling from home), local-food production, etc. 2. Identify New Revenue Sources  Find a way for the City’s economic development position to devote full time to economic development activities and adequately fund necessary programs and activities.  Establish a specific process, time frame and implementation plan for the sole purpose of identifying new sources of revenue.  Promote the redevelopment of Hwy 99. The City should do everything possible to facilitate development, including Transit Oriented Development. Planned Action SEPA is one example of tools used to encourage development.  Create a Redevelopment Plan, via a City driven Master Plan process, in order to reach the goal of eventually redeveloping Old Safeway and Skippers properties. This will provide continuity in development verses a disjointed approach.  Implement Neighborhood Business Center plans for Five Corners & Westgate during year 2010. These are 'ready' for redevelopment and only need new zoning and development regulations/guidleines. A consultant could be hired by the City to run a public design/planning process and help create and adopt new zoning and design standards for both areas. Packet Page 233 of 343 o Support neighborhood centers that promote employment, affordable transportation and housing, and capaCity-building services.  The City has an opportunity to position itself so as to attract businesses that wish to utilize the City’s fiber optics network. Support efforts to prepare a business plan related to the City’s ability to utilize its fiber optic system. This is needed before any decisions can be made as to how best to move forward.  Recruit businesses looking to expand that have been successful in other Puget Sound cities.  Form a public/private partnership for business recruitment and retention. The partnership should explore ways to: o Expand businesses related to health care, medicine, biotech, medical equipment, etc. o Motivate land owners to assemble smaller parcels for redevelopment. There are a number of underutilized lots (Burlington Coat Factory, the storage place) that could be used to attract more lucrative businesses. o Focus businesses towards larger sites: family oriented restaurants, commercial center retail, and one or two larger retailers (big box)  The City could explore modifying zoning along the edges of downtown to allow residential on the first floor in buildings where the street level has spent long periods vacant. These sites/units could serve as Live-Work sites until the area can fully support 100% commercial.  Implement Transit oriented development (TOD) tools to support Downtown/Waterfront and Highway 99 Corridor areas in concert with regional transit providers.  Review ways to promote more use of public rights of way, i.e., sidewalks for cafes, short time sales, art displays, etc.  Review City light industrial zoning and capacity 3. Increasing Tourism Tourism is the fastest growing and one of the top three industries in 49 of 50 states and in every Canadian province. Tourism is an economic development activity that helps diversify the local economy, creates jobs and business opportunities, and lastly, a City’s front door to its non-tourism economic development efforts.1 The City of Edmonds Economic Development Department has significantly increased the visibility of the City of Edmonds since November of 2007, as demonstrated by the following list year 2009 publications, website and miscellaneous items where advertisements were placed: o 2009 Greater Seattle InfoGuide 1 Destination Development, Inc. ”The Art of Branding a Community”. by Roger Brooks. Packet Page 234 of 343 o 2009 Snohomish County Visitor’s Guide o 2009 Community Trade and Economic Development Official Tourism Guide o 2009 Washington State Hotel and Lodging Association Official Tourism Guide o ExperienceWA.com – Washington State’s official tourism website o 2009 City of Edmonds Community Calendar of Events o Public Art Review (National publication – Spring/Summer) o Alaska Airlines (May) o Southwest Airlines (April) o Vancouver Magazine (April) o 2009 Washington Festivals and Events Calendar o QFC Pharmacy Bags (Jan – august, 2009) City staff have also worked with a number of publications and feature articles about the City of Edmonds were published in the following magazines and newspapers: o “Downtown Edmonds” -- Seattle Premier Monthly Magazine – March, 2009 o “Discover Edmonds…..a ferry-tale City” -- 425 Magazine - April, 2009 o “Downtown Edmonds has changed a bit since the 1960s — in good ways” – Seattle Time, January 5, 2009 o “Cruising in Puget Sound, Port of Edmonds” -- Northwest Yachting Magazine – November, 2009 o “Write on the Sound writers’ conference” – Writer’s Digest – September, 2009 The City of Edmonds Economic Development Department Director has indicated he has initiated additional programs and tasks to improve tourism. City staff have secured website domain names, e.g., VisitEdmonds.com for the purposes of marketing, and to eventually provide direct links to the City’s Visitor’s Guide with the goal of creating a tourism website. As of December, 2009, the City of Edmonds is now a member of Seattle’s Convention and Visitor's Bureau (CVB). As a member, the City of Edmonds will be included in each CVB publication and now has an opportunity to distribute brochures at the Convention Visitors Information Center. City staff is reviewing the need to hire a web master to develop a tourism website while at the same time working with the Chamber of Commerce to ensure that effective messages and information are contained within the website. The City’s Economic Development Department in partnerships with the City’s Cultural Services Division, and other entities and organizations throughout the City and region, will work to promote and sustain a vibrant cultural community. According to the City’s Community Cultural Plan (2008), this will be done by:  Building upon Edmonds’ identity as a cultural destination  Encouraging effective partnerships to support cultural opportunities  Developing cultural facilities  Increasing visibility and accessibility of cultural events, and Packet Page 235 of 343  Broadening community involvement and participation. Areas the Economic Development Commission Planning Board wish to explore and study further include:  Branding Edmonds. The Economic Development Commission and Planning Board also see the need to initiate a process to brand the Community. This is not the same as developing a slogan or logo. Branding is about perception, i.e., what people think of you, not what you say you are. A branding exercise is a chance to define the City’s identity resulting in a consistent and compelling theme and focused message to create interest in the City of Edmonds as a destination for businesses and visitors.  Creating a Tourism Web site  Ways to make Edmonds the Northwest Arts Capital  How to attract a more diverse demographic, e.g., age, income, culture, etc., to the City of Edmonds 4. Improving Commercial Viability If the City can better enable businesses and other employers to grow and improve, the benefits accrue not only to the people who hold those jobs, but also to the employers who sell the products and services those people create and the communities that can grow as a result of that economic activity. The extant general language about building up the neighborhood centers needs to get turned into explicit zoning changes if redevelopment is to happen. A developer does not want to come to the City and spend a year or more facing the uncertainty of whether or not a parcel will be rezoned for redevelopment. The City needs to have the zoning in place to attract a developer, not wait for business to come along and request a rezone. Other neighboring cities are doing this during this economic downturn. Edmonds must or the City will be left behind when the economy improves.  Implement Transit Oriented Development plan for Hwy 99 and Downtown. Could be two separate items. Hwy 99 takes advantage of high-intensity use areas and BRT initiative. Standards for transit- oriented development tied to incentives (e.g. reduced or more flexible parking standards, priority or discounted permitting) for development. Downtown would be tied to Sound Transit, CT, etc. development. Public/private partnerships should be explored with Sound Transit, WSF, etc.  Identify priorities and commit to ongoing effort to simplify and streamline City regulations and rules. These should be aligned with an adopted Strategic Plan (see above).  Advocate for process improvements to simplify and improve interactions with small business  More efficient regulation. This is not about lowering the City’s regulatory standards, but rather about improving the efficiency with which they are implemented. Packet Page 236 of 343  Expedite permitting that meets primary objectives and one stop permit guidance for new locating businesses Packet Page 237 of 343 Overall Recommendations  Strategic Planning – City Council should commit to developing/reviewing/updating a strategic plan every year, ideally corresponding to their annual retreat. Purpose would be to set/confirm priorities within the Strategic Plan and link those to the City’s adopted Budget, Economic Development Plan, Community Sustainability Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Transportation Plan, Streetscape Plan, Parks and Recreation Plan, Cultural Plan, and long range planning efforts. o Explore ways to devote staff, time and funding to long-term strategic planning, its relation to budgeting, and develop a plan for implementing a long-term strategic plan.  Government actions and policies significantly shape the City’s business climate. o City leadership needs to focus on, and prioritize, major efforts/initiatives that effect the overall business community and quality of life for residents as a whole as opposed to focusing time, energy, and money on less significant issues. o It is time to initiate, not react.  Improve left turns from Hwy 99 and improve highway crossings, including pedestrian crossings  Support increase in Economic Development Department budget necessary to recruit, retain and expand businesses  Time is of the essence. The City needs to start laying the groundwork for economic development immediately. A portion of the savings from reducing expenses of the Fire Dept. should be spent on economic development activities, not set aside for the future. o The savings could be used to hire consultants to help staff achieve many of the ideas raised in this report.  Edmonds should adopt economic development as one of its goals.  Edmonds is no longer a bedroom community. Continuing to function as a City that is heavily dependent on residential revenue will damage the City in the long run. The City needs to diversify its tax base with a more balanced residential/commercial mix.  The City Council, Mayor, City staff, Chamber of Commerce and other organizations need to work together in support of common goals. Prepare, adopt and expand upon existing Economic Development Plan policies that support a diverse, innovative, competitive, entrepreneurial, and sustainable local economy Packet Page 238 of 343 Attachment 1 PLANNING BOARD Report to City Council January 19, 2010 INTRODUCTION The Edmonds Planning Board is charged with the task of reviewing and considering strategies for economic development in conjunction with the Citizens Economic Development Commission as set forth in Ordinance 3735. These strategies are to be developed from a land use perspective given that our role as a planning board is to address land use issues. The overall intent is to improve commercial viability, tax revenue base, and tourism activity within the City of Edmonds all of which contribute to the quality of life of our citizens. BACKGROUND Our city, region, and the nation are reeling from an unforeseen economic downturn. Market conditions are making it extremely difficult to rebound in ways that normally get us back on track. Reliance on real estate taxes and automobile sales taxes, two of our largest contributors to city revenue in the past, are no longer saviors for our current condition. It's no longer business as usual so we must get innovative, look to see what's working and what's not around us, and create the change that's needed in how we do things in this city. While the Planning Board will undertake studies, analyses and strategies designed to contribute to both economic and livability sustainability conditions within the City, we believe that the Council needs to provide leadership and proactive participation [partnering] in the process in order to enable realization of any such developed plans. The 60-plus membership of last Spring’s budget levy committee reported to the Council with the key findings that a levy measure should be enacted by the Council to supplement the city’s budget or the next 6 years. Additionally, the universal recommendation was then (and remains so today) that both plans and strategies for the future economic health of Edmonds should be led by the City Council. Mayor Haakenson reported on 12/30/09 in the media that: “If we do nothing, we will find ourselves in the same position in 2014 that we found ourselves in 2009.” If we do nothing, State and Federal mandates via the Growth Management Act will force decisions upon us without our input, and we will be facing outcomes that most if not all of us would not want especially around the transportation nodes. To address this deteriorating situation in light of a bleak economic forecast throughout our State and Country, we recommend that the City Council study the need to put to the voters a tax levy in 2010 to address both budget recoveries and ‘kick start’ economic development and revenue generation plan implementation within the City. With leadership and commitment from City Council, this first step must be taken and many more steps toward creating diverse revenue streams need to follow through our joined efforts. SHORT AND LONG TERM PROPOSALS UNDER STUDY Packet Page 239 of 343 Rationale Strategies and approaches are being addressed by the Planning Board which are intended to contribute to sustainability of the City in all aspects [economic, environmental, livability]. Economic development and effective fiscal management of the City should be undertaken by City Council along with skillfully guided grassroots efforts as a contributing force. The function of our Board is to study and recommend plans and guidelines regarding land use in conjunction with their associated Codes and the Comprehensive Plan for the City. We can only conduct action as set forth [enacted] by our elected leadership—the City Council. We must be partners in action if we are to accomplish what is needed. Commitments made by City Council towards a more sustainable Edmonds Resolution 1168 (April 2008) - established the City of Edmonds Sustainable Building Policy, established a LEED silver standard for certain remodels and new City buildings and facilities, emphasized life cycle cost analysis. Resolution 1169 (April 2008) - joined the Cascade Agenda as a Member City, endorsed Cascade Agenda principles of making the City complete, compact, and connected Resolution 1170 (April 2008) - committed to a set of environmental principles, policies and goals for future action; emphasis on City taking a leadership role in addressing climate issues; and recognizing key role of education, transit and TOD in a complete and coordinated policy framework December 1, 2009 Mayor signed a contract with Cascade Land Conservancy to become a Cascade Agenda Leadership City. Becoming a leadership city will allow CLC to partner with Edmonds as well as conduct a livability assessment that considers the City’s policies and programs and compares them to other leadership cities to identify things Edmonds is doing that could work in other cities and to share things other cities are doing with Edmonds. Planning Board Suggestions Strategies and goals listed below are those the Planning Board can support and work with City Council on as needed: 1) The City should encourage and enable a renewal of appropriate’ branding’ for Edmonds. [likely led by the business community] 2) Assign timeline and dollar allocations to both create and carry out a strategic plan towards stated goals. Some goals will take a long time (5-10 years) to implement. Set up a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis to track progress. 3) City must provide and ‘couple’ budget funds annually with established action plan (implementation) in order to produce real trackable results. If the City does not undertake responsible growth plans, other governing agencies may very well do so on our ‘behalf’ Packet Page 240 of 343 4) City will need Code and Comprehensive Plan revisions to enable meaningful commercial development in the immediate as well as long-term future within the City. 5) Plan implementation strategies should provide for linkage between future development and/or redevelopment of applicable available areas within the City; ie. Port of Edmonds Harbor Square Master Planning with development of remaining waterfront area(s). 6) Address and provide any linkage necessary between Edmonds Sustainability Element strategies developed and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Vision 2040 plan as related to WA Growth Management Act (GMA) currently projected to (only) 2025. 7) Support and coordinate through your leadership, interest groups, citizens' committees, and various functions within the City that are actively pursuing plans and strategies to enhance aspects of the quality of life and sustainability of our city: 1. City Parks, Recreation and Cultural Development [Yost/Aquatics, new parks, 4th Ave. Arts Corridor, Interurban Trail] 2. South County Senior Center 3. Civil Service Commission 4. Public Facilities District 5. Port of Edmonds [Yacht club, Harbor Square Master planning] 6. Historic Preservation Commission [increased elements identification] 7. DEMA [sponsored events, linkage of merchants] 8. Economic Development undertakings by the City. 9. Lead and sub-groups under Transportation Plan 10. Edmonds in Bloom 11. Edmonds Arts 12. Rose House/Center for Creative and Humanitarian Endeavors 13. Edmonds Conference Center 14. Edmonds Mural Society 15. Rotary Club of Edmonds 16. Edmonds Center for the Arts 17. Edmonds Historical Museum 18. Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society 19. Sustainable Edmonds 20. Friends of the Library 21. Friends of the Marsh Packet Page 241 of 343 Attachment 1.1 PLANNING BOARD APPENDIX to Report to City Council Jan. 19, 2009 Resources and Presentations throughout 2009 geared to Planning and Sustainability PB 4/8/09 Retreat PB met as a group for extended discussion on history, trends, and desired direction for planning purposes over the course of 2010. The Board is committed to the long term goal of creating a sustainable city from an environmental, economic, and livability standpoint. The Board sees the need to work collaboratively with the City Council in both planning and realizing actions to achieve sustainability goals and is willing to investigate and study a number of factors that have been impeding efforts to keep pace with surrounding communities as population grows, resources become stretched, and infrastructure and buildings age. The Planning Board suggested three goals to focus on: 1) Developing a vision for Edmonds and potentially going through a branding process for the city 2) Continued utilization of sustainable practices towards efficiency, longevity of, and livability within the city 3) Addressing and reconciling political issues impacting productive plan(s) and implementation thereof PB 6/24/09 Meeting Jennifer Gerend, the city’s prior Director of Economic Development, presented an overview of opportunities and challenges for us to consider. Opportunities 1) Promote mixed use development in neighborhood "nodes" (Firdale, 5 Corners, etc.) 2) Downtown could be enhanced for pedestrian shopping zone 3) Bolder marketing efforts when development plans are viable and progressive Challenges 1) Hwy 99 needs "more generous development regulations" 2) Building height limit possibilities for innovative development 3) Need better balance of zoning/Development Code(s) and financial feasibility of projects Stephen Clifton, the city’s current Director of Economic Development, talked about the status and opportunities relating to transportation and land use in downtown and waterfront areas. Listed are a number of Packet Page 242 of 343 th th Packet Page 243 of 343 Citizen's comments were offered and included some of the following specifics that were also discussed by planning board members: 1) Enhance attractiveness of city to younger people 2) Possibly have a year-round farmers market 3) Concerns about Edmonds marsh preservation and creating public access 4) Concerns about rising water levels in Puget Sound due to climate change 5) Climate Action Plan is being worked on by the Mayors Climate Protection Committee (See minutes for more data discussion—actually over many PB meetings) Packet Page 244 of 343 23 PB 10/14/09 Meeting Presentation of Department on Edmonds Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Plan for 2009–2015. The body of this report indicates that the plan's elements have either funding sources associated or identified within. PB 11/4/09 Meeting Capital Facilities Update for 2009-2015 to City’s Comp. Plan Citizens’ Advisory Committee for Transportation proposed an increase in funding for TBD (voter approval required) Friends of Edmonds Marsh 1) Habitat preservation/enhancement 2) Daylighting of Willow Creek to Sound discharge 3) Increase/enhance public access and use Edmonds Bicycle Advisory Group is promoting infrastructure improvements towards convenience and safety of bicycle exercise and transportation. They are seeking grant funding for these projects to supplement city funding. PB 12/9/09 Meeting Presentation of the City of Edmonds Climate Action Plan: an outcome of the Mayors Climate Protection Committee. This is a strategy plan that provides a framework for action items leading to potential reduction of greenhouse gases within Edmonds. It will serve as an adjunct to recently approved Sustainability Element within the Comp. Plan. The following are areas of focus within the plan element: 1) Transportation and land use 2) Lifestyles 3) Buildings 4) Environment 5) Economy 6) Community Outreach and Empowerment Packet Page 245 of 343 AM-2774 Friday, Session 2, Topic 4: General Funding and Levy/Infrastructure Funding Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Topic 4: General Funding and Levy/Infrastructure Funding and Bonds (45 Minutes) Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Friday Session 2 Topic 4 General Funding AWC funding handbook Link: Friday Session 2 Topic 4 general funding data sorted by levy rate regular Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:25 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:38 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 08:31 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 246 of 343 A Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns REPORT NUMBER 46 RevisedJune 2009 Municipal Research and Services Center Packet Page 247 of 343 A Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns REPORT NUMBER 46 Revised June 2009 $16 City ™ $24 Other Packet Page 248 of 343 Copyright © 2009 by the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means or stored in a database or retrieval system without the prior written permission of the publisher; however, governmental entities in the state of Washington are granted permission to reproduce and distribute this publication for official use. Municipal Research and Services Center 2601 4th Avenue, Suite 800 Seattle, WA 98121-1280 www.mrsc.org mrsc@mrsc.org 206.625.1300 Packet Page 249 of 343 Preface This new edition of A Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns, first published in 1992 and last revised in 1999, contains up-to-date information on the major revenue sources (and many of the minor ones) available to cities and towns for general government purposes, including the relevant statutory references and important court decisions. Judith Cox, Public Finance Consultant, was the primary author of this report. Bob Meinig, Legal Consultant, reviewed and edited the entire text. Holly Stewart, Desktop Publishing Specialist, prepared the document for publication. Richard Yukubousky Executive Director Packet Page 250 of 343 Contents Taxes .....................................................................1 Property Taxes.............................................................1 The Regular Property Tax Levy Rate.........................................1 Property Tax Levy Increase – A Little History of the “Lid” ........................2 How Does the Tax Lid Work? ..............................................3 You Don’t Lose It If You Don’t Use It – “Banking” Levy Capacity ..................5 Property Taxes and Budgets ...............................................5 Excess Levies for General Government Purposes – If You Don’t Have Banked Capacity, Maybe You Can Do a Levy Lid Lift .......................10 Excess Levies for General Government Purposes – One Year Levy ...............13 Receipt of Funds .......................................................14 Retail Sales and Use Tax....................................................15 What’s the City Rate? ...................................................15 If Cities Get Only 0.85 Percent, Who Gets the Rest? ...........................15 What Items Are Taxed? ..................................................17 Who Has to Pay a Use Tax? ..............................................17 Sales Tax Streamlining ..................................................18 Timing of Receipts and Sales Tax Rate Changes ..............................19 General Business and Occupation Taxes and Business Licenses ...................20 General Business and Occupation Taxes....................................20 Regulatory License Fees.................................................22 Revenue-Generating Regulatory Licenses ...................................22 Utility Business and Occupation Taxes.........................................24 What Are the Limits on the Tax Rate?.......................................24 What Do We Need to Do to Change a Rate? .................................25 Real Estate Excise Tax .....................................................26 How Can the First Quarter Percent – REET 1 – Be Spent? ......................26 Spending the Second Quarter Percent – REET 2 ..............................27 “What’s This Other One-Half Percent Real Estate Excise Tax (“REET 3")?” .........28 Accounting for These Funds ..............................................29 Hotel-Motel (Lodging) Tax ...................................................30 What Are the Tax Rates?.................................................30 City or County Tax?.....................................................31 How Can the Revenues Be Used? .........................................32 Reporting Requirements .................................................33 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee ..........................................34 Emergency Medical Services ................................................35 Gambling Tax.............................................................36 How Can We Spend the Proceeds?........................................36 Leasehold Excise Tax ......................................................37 Use Tax on Brokered Natural Gas ............................................37 Admission Tax ............................................................38 Packet Page 251 of 343 Contents continued State-Shared Revenues .................................................40 Liquor Receipts – Profits and Taxes ...........................................41 Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax – “Gas Tax” .....................................41 Capron Refunds ...........................................................42 Fire Insurance Premium Tax .................................................43 City-County Assistance .....................................................43 Criminal Justice Revenues ..............................................46 Funds Distributed under RCW 82.14.320 – “High Crime”..........................47 Funds Distributed under RCW 82.14.330 – Population, Violent Crime, and Special Programs...................................................48 Optional Sales Taxes.......................................................48 0.1 Percent Sales Tax Under RCW 82.14.340 ................................48 0.3 Percent Sales Tax Under RCW 82.14.450 ................................49 Transportation Revenues ...............................................50 Local Option Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax.....................................50 Local Option Commercial Parking Tax .........................................51 Expenditure of Local Option Transportation Taxes ...............................51 Transportation Benefit Districts...............................................52 Other Revenue Sources .................................................54 Franchise Fees ...........................................................54 Tourism Promotion Area Fees ................................................54 Transfer of Funds from Municipally-Owned Utilities ...............................55 Transfer of Funds from the LID Guaranty Fund ..................................56 Interest on Investments .....................................................56 Traffic and Parking Fines....................................................56 Parking Meters............................................................57 Other Fees and Charges....................................................57 Packet Page 252 of 343 Taxes Property Taxes One longtime legislative analyst from Olympia says that the Washington property tax is the most complicated in the nation. We plan to limit this discussion to what officials and staff in cities1 really need to know. Even that is pretty complicated. Cities face two primary restrictions on their property taxes – a maximum regular property tax levy rate and a limit on the amount of additional property taxes they can levy in a year. ™ The Regular Property Tax Levy Rate The maximum regular property tax levy rate for most cities is $3.375 per thousand dollars assessed valuation (AV).2 Some cities have a Firemen’s Pension Fund. (If you do not know whether you have one, you probably do not.) Those cities can levy an additional $0.225 per thousand dollars assessed valuation, resulting in a maximum levy of $3.60 per thousand dollars AV.3 For cities that belong to a fire district and/or a library district, the rules are a little more complicated. Nominally they have a maximum rate of $3.60 per thousand dollars AV. But, they can never collect that much because the levy of the special districts must be subtracted from that amount.4 The library district levy has a maximum rate of $.50 per thousand dollars AV5 and the fire district levy can be as high as $1.50.6 Therefore, if a city belongs to both a fire district and a library district, and if these districts are currently levying their maximum amount, then the local levy rate can be no higher than $1.60 ($3.60 - 1.50 - 0.50 = $1.60). (Note that the Department of Revenue 1Throughout this publication, the words “city” or “cities” is used rather than the phrases “city and town” or “cities and towns.” Unless otherwise noted, everything said about cities also applies to towns. 2RCW 84.52.043(1)(d). 3RCW 41.16.060. 4RCW 27.12.390 and RCW 52.04.081. 5RCW 27.12.050. 6RCW 52.16.130, RCW 52.16.140, and RCW 52.16.160 each provide for a levy of $.50 per thousand dollars AV. A Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns 1 Packet Page 253 of 343 2009 City Population and Property Tax Data Sorted by PopulationNote: 2009 sales tax data will not be available until January 2010Levy Rate Due in 2009 Due in 2009 Due in 2009CityPopulation Valuation Regular Regular Levy Levies Total Taxes Harrington42514,494,703 3.375048,920048,920Nespelem2052,944,733 3.37509,93909,939Lamont953,027,483 3.375010,218010,218Almira2859,229,754 3.328530,721030,721Kettle Falls1,65562,875,018 3.2776206,0790206,079Cosmopolis1,640102,734,011 3.2708336,023114,266450,289Goldendale3,745285,484,692 3.2613931,0630931,063Sumas1,326163,668,806 3.2611533,7470533,747Lind56519194797 3.2560962500062500Hoquiam8,765432,230,842 3.2482 1,403,9720 1,403,972Republic1,00533,844,199 3.2236109,1000109,100Raymond3,010130,142,586 3.2111417,89937,645455,544Spangle27514,683,181 3.156646,34924,18070,529Grandview9,405416,389,495 3.1556 1,313,96185,000 1,398,961Davenport1,74070,494,655 3.1524222,2270222,227Marcus1705,210,363 3.146416,394016,394Washtucna2356372607 3.1387520,002 - 20,002 Wilbur89534,988,310 3.1254109,3540109,354Hartline1454,122,422 3.121412,868012,868Kahlotus2203,576,888 3.119911,159011,159Sprague49514,897,155 3.107046,286046,286Tonasket1,01036,754,533 3.1000113,9390113,939Camas16,9503148909719 3.090239730842686972 10,417,814Wilson Creek2506,398,088 3.062719,596019,596Northport31011,802,056 3.045235,940035,940Othello6,595413014112 3.03769125460701254607Creston2506,256,559 3.033118,977018,977Endicott30510,558,393 3.027131,96127,50459,465Rosalia64019,668,524 3.019659,39149,999109,390Hatton1102327634 3.00735700007000Aberdeen16,440824,124,625 2.9710 2,448,474436,166 2,884,640Reardan63024,085,639 2.960571,306071,306Quincy6,030763,611,756 2.9434 2,247,5760 2,247,57651Packet Page 254 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxMoses Lake18,930 1,779,747,198 2.9198 5,196,4170 5,196,417Cashmere3,005167,669,521 2.9093487,79753,479541,276Sunnyside15,340612,170,687 2.9089 1,780,717535,380 2,316,097Prosser5,110365,389,454 2.8922 1,056,763158,000 1,214,763LaCrosse34510,803,592 2.891131,234031,234Yakima84,850 5,368,959,341 2.8886 15,508,982268,000 15,776,982Ritzville1,74096285978 2.862742756420275642Coulee City60024,906,815 2.856571,14617,50088,646Mesa45512,688,036 2.826935,868035,868Pullman27,600 1,282,687,595 2.7972 3,587,934281,373 3,869,307Tieton1,19556,614,040 2.7899157,9470157,947Malden2004,048,712 2.783911,271011,271Odessa96034,197,316 2.781195,107095,107South Prairie44038,448,898 2.7568105,9960105,996Brewster2,205100,237,951 2.7565276,3080276,308Grand Coulee94033,936,374 2.743493,102093,102Longview36,010 2,902,511,391 2.7240 7,906,3940 7,906,394Wapato4,555152,762,927 2.7198415,4810415,481Wenatchee30,960 1,980,222,931 2.7172 5,380,695365,653 5,746,348Dayton2,735119,197,326 2.7165323,8020323,802Richland47,410 4,405,555,654 2.7141 11,957,068 1,863,287 13,820,355Eatonville2,405230,640,572 2.7100625,0360625,036Farmington1355,981,978 2.701516,16018,00034,160Krupp602,523,489 2.68546,77706,777Tekoa83023,729,603 2.684663,70474,999138,703Oakesdale42015,611,213 2.683941,89950,00091,899Electric City98534,590,397 2.678892,660092,660Warden2,605128,502,285 2.6608341,9210341,921Pateros63042,253,635 2.6365111,4020111,402Vader63025,637,395 2.634167,532067,532Garfield63021,101,041 2.629755,489055,489Uniontown33519,138,518 2.624150,221050,221Toppenish9,090272,220,641 2.6171712,4160712,416Mabton2,10037,018,062 2.616896,867096,867Morton1,14076,864,560 2.6150201,0000201,000Union Gap5,830546,353,843 2.6121 1,427,1440 1,427,144Omak4,780275,357,140 2.6044717,1520717,152Elmer City2406,693,792 2.589717,335017,335Spokane205,500 15,348,603,178 2.5852 39,678,814 12,907,628 52,586,44252Packet Page 255 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxSouth Bend1,77080,617,622 2.5800207,9920207,992Albion61018,274,472 2.568046,929046,929Connell3,430124,666,548 2.5677320,1110320,111Waterville1,18052,976,875 2.5276133,9040133,904Harrah59518,089,697 2.510545,413045,413Washougal13,870 1,607,321,033 2.5091 4,032,999118,000 4,150,999Colfax2,910144,571,157 2.5002361,4570361,457Colville5,040382,223,666 2.4983954,9120954,912Prescott32011,995,713 2.491729,890029,890Okanogan2,495106,377,065 2.4903264,9100264,910Concrete83590,390,694 2.4892225,0010225,001Ephrata7,110407,445,006 2.4859 1,012,8710 1,012,871Ione44013,853,161 2.476734,310034,310Selah7,185515,395,639 2.4755 1,275,86934,000 1,309,869McCleary1,55591,786,842 2.4739227,0710227,071Coulee Dam1,02543,547,068 2.4683107,4880107,488Pomeroy1,52562,508,431 2.4336152,1200152,120Elma3,110223,674,859 2.4252542,4560542,456Clarkston7,260331022134 2.425168027800 802,780Mattawa3,39542,242,305 2.4245102,4150102,415Metaline Falls2758,837,179 2.410721,304021,304Oroville1,75098,470,066 2.4049236,8080236,808Cusick1959,105,879 2.402021,873021,873Fairfield59033,663,470 2.383180,222080,222Tukwila18,170 5,175,709,975 2.3732 12,283,1930 12,283,193Renton83,650 13,173,773,069 2.3692 31,211,7160 31,211,716Castle Rock2,145122,696,283 2.3553288,9840288,984Mansfield33010,712,386 2.345325,123025,123SeaTac25,730 4,887,648,387 2.3393 11,433,7160 11,433,716Twisp98565,306,693 2.3389152,7430152,743Bridgeport2,09038,927,422 2.338391,024091,024Zillah2,770153,035,839 2.3346357,2840357,284Vancouver164,500 16,895,019,331 2.3155 39,120,2010 39,120,201Waitsburg1,24557,724,500 2.3041133,0000133,000Airway Heights5,515264,306,995 2.3019608,401141,999750,400Rockford49325,588,772 2.291658,63810,00068,638Cheney10,550452,078,983 2.2893 1,034,9360 1,034,936Shelton8,965759,590,237 2.2884 1,738,239241,646 1,979,885Kennewick67,180 4,373,699,449 2.2846 9,992,066375,000 10,367,06653Packet Page 256 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxNaches76549,168,639 2.2632111,2810111,281St. John53030,766,360 2.259469,51447,351116,865Mount Vernon30,800 2,837,921,239 2.2535 6,395,256509,887 6,905,143Riverside33011,560,664 2.247425,981025,981Walla Walla31,610 2,045,373,327 2.2369 4,575,2200 4,575,220Granger3,06582,384,463 2.2335184,0070184,007Colton42024,216,943 2.233454,08633,06187,147Hamilton30017,501,837 2.232139,066039,066Yacolt1,47097,059,901 2.2255216,0040216,004Tacoma203,400 21,625,087,509 2.2165 47,930,876 2,896,649 50,827,525Soap Lake1,79058,151,516 2.2014128,0160128,016Everett103,500 14,261,787,954 2.1966 31,327,7200 31,327,720Palouse1,01047,520,032 2.1798103,58466,000169,584Oakville71535,093,311 2.157575,714075,714Montesano3,565310,166,414 2.1395663,6010663,601Kent88,380 12,758,738,254 2.1331 27,215,142600,017 27,815,159Steilacoom6,285786,024,813 2.1219 1,667,8480 1,667,848Asotin1,23073591953 2.119011559420 155,942Long Beach1,535249,064,174 2.1165527,1360527,136Stanwood5,590857,788,432 2.1054 1,805,957221,341 2,027,298Snoqualmie9,730 2,095,348,765 2.1047 4,410,150277,509 4,687,659Springdale2809,074,200 2.101019,065019,065North Bonneville88086,188,361 2.0961180,6570180,657Orting6,135577,187,234 2.0476 1,181,8510 1,181,851Sammamish40,670 9,814,079,429 2.0357 19,978,8150 19,978,815Latah1897,710,507 2.026415,624015,624Puyallup38,690 4,755,926,244 2.0241 9,626,340 1,430,000 11,056,340Pe Ell67032,175,649 2.020265,000065,000Port Angeles19,260 1,994,259,574 2.0129 4,014,245669,197 4,683,442Pasco54,490 2,863,125,470 2.0042 5,738,336535,275 6,273,611Oak Harbor23,360 1,897,999,833 2.0000 3,795,967246,800 4,042,767Stevenson1,455191,355,166 1.9971382,1580382,158College Place9,035545,046,694 1.9838 1,081,237210,620 1,291,857Tenino1,535120,554,120 1.9815238,88329,850268,733Bremerton36,620 3,084,741,017 1.9690 6,073,895887,699 6,961,594Rock Island87526,240,374 1.955851,322051,322Everson2,285153,441,308 1.9497299,1650299,165Port Orchard8,440833,125,854 1.9488 1,623,6070 1,623,607Newport2,020128,346,147 1.9445249,5660249,56654Packet Page 257 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxMedical Lake4,845241,746,968 1.9427469,6510469,651Port Townsend8,895 1,239,858,735 1.9400 2,405,3260 2,405,326Olympia45,250 5,963,060,847 1.9373 11,552,2270 11,552,227Kittitas1,15070,080,160 1.9336135,5040135,504Ellensburg17,230 1,225,498,404 1.9310 2,366,450139,287 2,505,737Woodland5,195569,426,303 1.9209 1,093,7940 1,093,794Forks3,185158,393,699 1.9136303,0940303,094Entiat1,17070,673,249 1.9076134,8190134,819Yelm5,625681,798,924 1.9070 1,300,1850 1,300,185Chehalis7,185610,719,108 1.8952 1,157,4170 1,157,417Bucoda66529,784,108 1.882356,061056,061Napavine1,690123,770,161 1.8771232,3340232,334Fircrest6,325746,975,432 1.8754 1,400,9080 1,400,908Ferndale11,080 1,060,113,522 1.8722 1,984,7550 1,984,755Nooksack1,16377,642,145 1.8689145,1050145,105Marysville37,530 4,757,617,443 1.8670 8,882,307226,673 9,108,980Tumwater16,710 2,472,464,185 1.8579 4,593,528401,871 4,995,399Sedro-Woolley10,070930,140,024 1.8569 1,727,177209,999 1,937,176Winlock1,37081,107,572 1.8441149,5690149,569Lacey39,250 4,892,602,232 1.8399 9,001,828 1,180,825 10,182,653Winthrop42578,925,804 1.8223143,8250143,825Lynden11,690 1,292,080,947 1.8173 2,348,047220,518 2,568,565Enumclaw 11,460 1,166,421,185 1.8167 2,119,070125,413 2,244,483Starbuck1305,016,364 1.81419,10009,100Kelso11,840727,939,344 1.8090 1,316,848872 1,317,720South Cle Elum57552,870,598 1.794694,883094,883Chewelah2,420202,564,238 1.7781360,1830360,183Waverly1195,829,605 1.769910,318010,318Bellingham76,130 8,079,556,522 1.7243 18,065,566361,161 18,426,727Ocean Shores4,860 1,361,960,357 1.7209 2,343,796 1,782,538 4,126,334Mossyrock69532,504,225 1.718955,872055,872George55017,663,714 1.715930,310030,310Millwood1,660222,597,519 1.7143381,6010381,601Newcastle9,925 2,329,921,833 1.6992 3,958,9620 3,958,962Bingen685106,892,612 1.6958181,2640181,264Burlington8,870 1,390,315,144 1.6943 2,355,6110 2,355,611Kalama2,505205,842,675 1.6930348,4890348,489Skykomish21032,626,858 1.625853,046053,046Ruston765125,083,079 1.6242203,1600203,16055Packet Page 258 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxWest Richland11,670714,801,732 1.6038 1,146,3640 1,146,364La Conner870171,878,754 1.6020275,35033,007308,357Ilwaco1,070117,543,392 1.5970187,7220187,722Metaline1656,099,476 1.59229,71209,712Royal City1,86535,131,799 1.573255,268055,268Buckley4,635457,478,593 1.5707718,5510718,551Seattle602,000 137,195,493,756$ 1.5508$ 335,773,713$ 18,248,416$ 354,022,129$ Mill Creek18,480 3,243,149,768 1.5398 4,993,8330 4,993,833Black Diamond4,180643,196,160 1.5207978,1220978,122Milton6,535779,921,992 1.5187 1,184,4800 1,184,480Liberty Lake7,270 1,167,407,349 1.5101 1,762,8390 1,762,839Spokane Valley89,440 7,019,508,327 1.4999 10,528,5050 10,528,505Battle Ground17,150 1,506,916,458 1.4958 2,253,9910 2,253,991Auburn67,485 8,719,780,134 1.4868 8,719,780,134 8,719,780,134 8,719,780,134Westport2,345347,153,101 1.4798513,71741,451555,168Rainier1,755141,401,386 1.4523205,3510205,351Roy87060,314,597 1.439586,824086,824Poulsbo8,855 1,378,218,255 1.4343 1,976,8360 1,976,836Lynnwood35,740 5,417,851,993 1.4264 7,728,1300 7,728,130Des Moines29,270 3,239,532,997 1.4216 4,605,1610 4,605,161Conconully21022,566,497 1.416731,969031,969Toledo69543,587,041 1.414161,634061,634Sultan4,555477,593,091 1.3927665,15630,595695,751Algona2,760446,120,389 1.3780614,7410614,741Sequim5,715900,145,266 1.3700 1,233,2080 1,233,208Moxee2,525232,215,097 1.3689317,8730317,873Langley1,100267,208,989 1.3680365,5270365,527Darrington1,505171,461,744 1.3637233,8180233,818Anacortes16,790 3,024,858,417 1.3594 4,111,993470,818 4,582,811East Wenatchee11,660 1,122,476,282 1.3374 1,501,1830 1,501,183Duvall5,980962,839,875 1.3345 1,284,8630 1,284,863Redmond51,890 14,514,484,055 1.3273 19,264,456289,750 19,554,206Benton City2,955101,731,657 1.2975131,9980131,998Cle Elum1,870350,637,268 1.2970454,7910454,791Granite Falls3,375324,923,902 1.2845417,3690417,369Mountlake Terrace20,960 2,403,174,145 1.2696 3,050,9450 3,050,945Burien31,890 4,269,535,769 1.2647 5,399,5710 5,399,571Index15516,530,098 1.247620,622020,622La Center2,545287,381,292 1.2444357,6090357,60956Packet Page 259 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxLake Stevens14,800 2,027,611,466 1.2320 2,498,0420 2,498,042North Bend4,760781,511,817 1.2269958,7990958,799Wilkeson46037,593,616 1.215645,697045,697Edmonds40,900 7,709,209,490 1.1999 9,250,299839,084 10,089,383Kenmore20,450 3,346,634,810 1.1997 4,014,8880 4,014,888Leavenworth2,300395,359,836 1.1952472,537100,000572,537Bothell33,240 6,901,876,915 1.1823 8,159,945619,984 8,779,929Coupeville1,910283,819,449 1.1822335,5360335,536Roslyn1,015155,760,757 1.1483178,85922,993201,852Fife7,610 2,232,235,640 1.1466 2,559,3910 2,559,391Gold Bar2,150178,745,176 1.1409203,9330203,933Lake Forest Park12,820 2,404,727,673 1.1405 2,742,6460 2,742,646Pacific6,290669,939,847 1.1000736,9330736,933Maple Valley20,840 2,578,828,368 1.0757 2,774,0630 2,774,063Beaux Arts Village315128,757,953 1.0729138,1430138,143University Place31,500 3,521,778,468 1.0645 3,748,9440 3,748,944Mukilteo20,110 4,164,912,117 1.0641 4,431,6940 4,431,694Cathlamet57563,210,980 1.050666,406066,406Carnation1,910226,508,434 1.0423236,0840236,084Bonney Lake16,500 2,393,756,664 1.0267 2,457,756355,303 2,813,059Kirkland49,010 13,112,363,966 1.0255 13,446,427 1,457,070 14,903,497Woodinville10,670 2,873,635,116 1.0211 2,934,2310 2,934,231Blaine4,740913,217,853 1.0167928,487136,091 1,064,578Chelan4,010995,588,318 1.0130 1,008,4860 1,008,486Brier6,490912,400,045 1.0093920,90029,600950,500Carbonado65045,149,737 1.007545,489045,489DuPont7,650 1,271,721,694 0.9974 1,268,41237,589 1,306,001Lakewood58,840 5,948,981,404 0.9960 5,925,0000 5,925,000Normandy Park6,485 1,449,290,493 0.9825 1,423,9340 1,423,934Covington17,530 2,112,708,897 0.9810 2,072,6490 2,072,649Federal Way88,580 9,825,319,904 0.9719 9,549,0970 9,549,097Arlington17,150 2,306,249,447 0.9711 2,239,6280 2,239,628Issaquah26,890 6,847,811,237 0.9620 6,587,465 1,113,032 7,700,497Edgewood9,615 1,390,286,001 0.9516 1,322,9370 1,322,937Shoreline54,320 7,939,596,024 0.9470 7,519,039 1,700,094 9,219,133Bellevue120,600 37,626,634,352 0.9368 35,250,0350 35,250,035Bainbridge Island23,290 6,815,782,164 0.9364 6,382,360544,715 6,927,075Monroe16,710 2,011,228,557 0.9323 1,874,98845,000 1,919,988Ridgefield4,215751,623,187 0.9312699,8990699,89957Packet Page 260 of 343 2009 City Population and Property TaxMercer Island22,720 10,310,337,535 0.9185 10,352,3210 10,352,321Gig Harbor7,165 1,967,770,378 0.8830 1,737,590250,000 1,987,590Lyman45038,521,657 0.860033,129033,129White Salmon2,220349,904,068 0.8272289,42681,445370,871Deer Park3,450256,392,628 0.7892202,3530202,353Snohomish9,145 1,288,902,877 0.7806 1,006,15356,545 1,062,698Woodway1,190615,093,594 0.7514462,1880462,188Medina2,970 2,996,996,744 0.7497 2,246,9400 2,246,940Friday Harbor2,260548,235,274 0.7445408,1390408,139Centralia15,570 1,056,773,377 0.5940627,7170627,717Yarrow Point965873,486,255 0.5421473,4920473,492Clyde Hill2,815 1,785,778,913 0.5100910,6800910,680Sumner9,085 2,014,010,234 0.4456897,5320897,532Hunts Point465853,534,091 0.2994255,5250255,525 Property tax data: Washinton State Department of Revenue Population data: Washington State Department of Financial Management58Packet Page 261 of 343 AM-2776 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 1: Waterfront Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Topic 1: Waterfront (60 Minutes) Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits 1 Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits 3 Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits 4 Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits (5) Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits (6). Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1 Fairhaven height limits (7) Link: Sat Session 3 - Topic 1 Waterfront - Shippen e-mail Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:13 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 09:10 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 262 of 343 Packet Page 263 of 343 Packet Page 264 of 343 Packet Page 265 of 343 Packet Page 266 of 343 Packet Page 267 of 343 Packet Page 268 of 343 Packet Page 269 of 343 AM-2778 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 1 B: Vision Suggestions: Waterfront and City-wide Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title B. Vision Suggestions: Waterfront and City-wide Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1B vision procedures Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1B Vision suggestion Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 1B Vision photos Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:13 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 09:34 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 270 of 343 Oakland Waterfront Public Participation Small Group Meetings – Draft Approach January 11, 2005 Purpose The purpose of small group meetings is to: 1) Better understand the various stakeholder interests and positions on the Proposed Oakland Harbor Partners (OHP) Plan; 2) Broaden citywide feedback and input on the plan; 3) Obtain input on other effective ways to reach out to the greater community for participation in the community meetings; 4) Gather input to help design the upcoming public meetings; and 5) Request that groups encourage their membership to attend the upcoming community meetings Elected officials and agency representatives are not included in this stakeholder interview process because it is assumed they will provide input during regularly scheduled meetings for review of the development plan. Approach These small group meetings are meant to be informal exchanges between representatives of the City’s consultant team and interested parties. PAM will develop an agenda to guide the discussion and ensure that a comprehensive exchange occurs in a candid atmosphere. PAM staff will begin the meetings by introducing themselves and their role on the project. Other details with regard to the approach include: • Nine small group meetings • 48 organizations invited to participate (see Attachment 1) • Will conduct 3 meetings/day over three or four days, approx. 60-90 minutes each • Dates: Weeks of January 31 and Feb. 7 • Location: Conference room at the Port or the Aquatic Center • Ben Strumwasser, Surlene Grant and Linda Weil will conduct the interviews. Two PAM Staff per meeting – one lead interviewer, one lead recorder. DRAFT Packet Page 271 of 343 • Meeting will include summary project background and history and a series of questions to solicit general and specific input on the Proposed Plan. • All comments from participants will be documented. • All small group meeting comments will be compiled into a summary report submitted to the City, Port, and developer. This report will be sent to all small group meeting attendees and available to other interested community members. DRAFT Packet Page 272 of 343 Attachment 1 Suggested Clusters for Small Group Meetings We recommend one representative participate from each of the following listed organizations. Our hope is to get as many of the individual representatives to participate in the separate meetings. Where it becomes difficult from a logistics standpoint to get their participation, we will encourage them to participate in the community meetings or conduct a separate interview for them. (These groups of organizations are not listed in any specific order.) Meeting #1 – Citizen Groups 1. Waterfront Action 2. Jack London Neighborhood Association 3. South of Nimitz Improvement Council (SoNic) 4. Fifth Ave. Waterfront Alliance 5. Fifth Ave. Institute Meeting #2 – Chambers of Commerce 6. Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce 7. Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce 8. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Alameda County 9. Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce Meeting #3 – Business Associations 10. Lake Merritt Business Association 11. Jack London Merchants Association 12. Economic Development Alliance for Business (EDAB) 13. Airport Area Business Association 14. Cypress Mandela Training Center 15. Building Trades Council of Alameda County 16. Bay Area Council 17. East Lake Merchants Association Meeting #4 – Community and Urban Dev. Issues (orgs interested in wide range of issues) 18. Urban Strategies Council 19. Policy Link 20. Urban Ecology 21. East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE) 22. San Antonio Community Development Corporation 23. Asian Health Services 24. East Bay Asian Youth Center 25. Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN) DRAFT Packet Page 273 of 343 DRAFT Suggested Clusters for Small Group Meetings (cont.) Meeting #5 – Housing & Other Community Groups 26. East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO) 27. East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation 28. Oakland Community Organization (OCO) 29. Oakland Citizens Community for Urban Renewal (OCCUR) 30. Oakland Coalition of Congregations (OCC) Meeting #6 – Environmental 31. Golden Gate Audubon Society 32. Lake Merritt Institute 33. Sierra Club 34. Baykeepers 35. Greenbelt Alliance Meeting #7 – Parks & Recreation 36. Oakland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee 37. Friends of Oakland Parks and Recreation 38. Jack London Aquatic Center Meeting #8 – Historic Preservation 39. Oakland Heritage Alliance 40. Friends of the 9th Ave. Terminal Meeting #9 – Other Oakland Neighborhood Groups 41. West Oakland Neighbors 42. Elmhurst 43. Brookfield/Columbian Gardens & Sobrante Park NCPC 44. Montclair Village Association 45. Dimond Improvement Association 46. Rockridge Community Planning Council 47. Fruitvale Unity Council 48. Oak Knoll Packet Page 274 of 343 Ten Year Plan Benefit residents already here, promote festival retailing; office space development; bring positive, low-impact, low-cost residential development downtown, promote tourism and reap benefits from the Winter Olympics. a. Waterfront and Senior Center Complete a continuous shoreline walkway from Brackett’s Landing to Point Edwards: complete a shoreline walkway with necklace of small parks ranging from natural beach to urban plaza to marina-oriented, especially with improvements at the senior center parking area; work with Port of Edmonds to integrate marina functions into the long term plan; reduce parking directly on waterfront; improve pedestrian crossing at railroad tracks; encourage transportation coordination between ferry/bus/train; maximize efficiency and access from one transportation mode to the other with pedestrian pathways and weather protection. Necklace of parks connected by walkways. . . . b. Sunset Avenue: Deserves some attention without huge capital investment; clean it up, take up a lane to make a trail with benches and views, reduce emphasis of parking and autos. Ten years form now could be nice. c. Downtown Mixed Use: Add benches and wider sidewalks downtown; remove a lane of parking or traffic and deed it for pedestrian/dining uses. Could be nice in ten years without big investment. Maintain the small town character and improve the attractive streetscape. Underground utilities should be required. Upgrade secondary downtown streets for pedestrians. Encourage senior housing a part of new development downtown. Upgrade Main Street connection to waterfront; improve pedestrian crossing at railroad tracks; improve pedestrian access through ferry holding lanes. Upgrade James Street as a special pedestrian and local access corridor. Continue successful “festival retailing” which blends retail, recreation, tourism, sustainability, and entertainment. Remain one of Puget Sound’s featured “festival retailing” locations from Vancouver’s Granville Island, to Bellingham, to Mount Vernon’s Tulip Festival, to Edmonds, to Seattle’s Pike Place Market , Port Townsend, La Connor, Leavenworth, Snohomish, Issaquah, Gig Harbor, Poulsbo, Langley, Winthrop and so forth. One of the most important opportunities is office space. Office space will be more in demand, to serve local populations and because Edmonds has ready access to convenient Packet Page 275 of 343 public transportation. In ten years, we should have lots of nice office space downtown. Office workers are happy shoppers. They get on the train and ferry and go home. d. Point Edwards Multimodal: Not important. It’s taking too much attention for too little. How much money is being spent while the budget suffers? e. Point Edwards Condominiums: Are they successful? I would appreciate a report that would compare “as built” to planning and promises. f. Old Safeway/Skippers: Needs a plan or a vision. Plan for future joint public/private development of area between 104 and railroad tracks. Activities potentially include property acquisition, infrastructure planning, parking management, development incentives and guidelines and modifications to land use regulations. Improve pedestrian crossing at railroad tracks. Build mixed- use/parking structure with upper deck for festivals and adequate parking, on-site or off- site. Construct overpasses to connect waterfront to rest of town. There must be a pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks between Main and Dayton Streets. The bridge could be built from the higher grade on the west side of downtown, to a public rooftop space on the Safeway property, across the tracks, probably to the senior center or to Brackett’s landing park. g. Port of Edmonds: Needs to partner with the City to continue to enhance connections between Port and downtown h. Marsh and Parks and Pedestrian Access: Improve the marsh to attract more visitors. We need to protect wetlands and continue to develop no intrusive interpretive trails and exhibits. Packet Page 276 of 343 Vision 1: Heritage Center/Museum flanked by a convention/community center and a mixed-use development with public rooftop This vision has a “heritage center” or perhaps a newly planted cedar forest, with photos or models of the mature cedar trees (they could double as cell phone towers) harvested here score-years past when Edmonds was founded: N Packet Page 277 of 343 Vision 2: Parks Galore Some will say this is not income producing. But neither is Central Park. It might attract a lot of tourists, we could make a “par 3” golf course, or federal funds could be received to turn it into a re-claimed wetland. Packet Page 278 of 343 Vision 3: Gateway Shopping, community center, mixed use Many of the renderings have the central “community center” or convention center. Experts may be able to conclude that such a facility, with a mix of short-term leases but also a minimum of construction costs due to the kind of building it is, which is primarily an open structure to support a large, covered, open air “festival area” and a support structure for pedestrian “suspension bridge” style walkways: “hard” “connections” from the rooftop park/observation deck area either west to the senior center or east to town. Packet Page 279 of 343 Vision 4: Rooftop Open Space, Reclaimed Wetland, Commercial and Residential A parking area along the north side of Dayton could be a huge income generator (taxes, not ownership) to the City over the next twenty years, taking advantage of rail/bus/ferry linkages. The roof top of such a structure, with or without viewing towers and accessory structures, could be a huge attraction for tourists and residents alike. At the north end of the property, a mixed-use retail/office building with adjacent townhouses subsidized for seniors or priced for the maximum financial return, with increased taxes on the higher sales. Packet Page 280 of 343 Vision 5: Senior Housing. If senior housing is on the action agenda, consider a lower-budget, serve-our-seniors concentration of pleasant housing in a centrally-located place. Here’s a plaza area behind the senior housing (bus stops across the street, of course), directly across from an activity center or a shopping/office center, or both: Packet Page 281 of 343 Vision 6: Centrally located community center, senior housing, commercial/retail. At the Skipper’s end, a substantial but compact building could have ground floor retail, if desired; upper floor residence; limited number of outdoor parking spaces required (city tax on each parking space?). Another option would be to “flip” the north and south ends: focus the senior housing in the Skipper’s area and develop the office (with retail, too, if it can fly) or live/work area at the south end. 8 Packet Page 282 of 343 Packet Page 283 of 343 Packet Page 284 of 343 Packet Page 285 of 343 Packet Page 286 of 343 Packet Page 287 of 343 Packet Page 288 of 343 Packet Page 289 of 343 Packet Page 290 of 343 Packet Page 291 of 343 Packet Page 292 of 343 Packet Page 293 of 343 Packet Page 294 of 343 Packet Page 295 of 343 Packet Page 296 of 343 Packet Page 297 of 343 Packet Page 298 of 343 STORM AND SURFACE WATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES Goal A: Manage the storm and surface water system through a combination of the preservation of natural systems and engineered solutions to:  Provide for public safety  Prevent property damage  Protect water quality  Preserve and enhance critical areas such as fish and wildlife habitat  Maintain a hydrologic balance  Promote sustainability Goal B: Preserve, protect, and, where feasible, restore wetlands, shorelines, surface water, and ground water for fish and wildlife, appropriate human use, and the maintenance of hydrological and ecological processes. Goal C: Use education as a tool to increase protection of critical areas and understanding of sustainability and other environmental values. Goal D: Provide adequate funding though an equitable stormwater utility rate structure and outside funding sources to support the necessary programs under goals A, B, and C. PROGRAM AREA 1: Flood Protection The flood protection program area is designed to meet Goals A & C by setting forth the following policies: FP-1: Comply with all applicable, relevant, and appropriates requirements from the Federal, state, and local governments related to flood protection. FP-2: Resolve long standing flooding impacts; prevent new flooding impacts to homes, businesses, and other facilities. Ensure adequate surface water services for existing and anticipated development at service levels designated by the Capital Facilities Element and Capital Improvement Plan. FP-3: Preserve and protect natural surface water storage sites, such as wetlands, aquifers, streams and water bodies that help regulate surface flows and recharge groundwater. FP-4: Restrict the water runoff rate from new development to a rate that does not damage downstream resources, usually the same rate as predevelopment conditions. Additional requirements which are more restrictive than this general policy may apply in the case of substantial redevelopment of parcels which were originally developed under non-existent or outdated stormwater control standards and contain large areas of impervious surfaces, have a high percentage of total impervious surfaces, or have identified drainage or water quality problems. FP-5: Promote development design which minimizes runoff rate and volume by limiting the size of the building footprint and total site coverage, minimizing impervious surfaces, maximizing the protection of Packet Page 299 of 343 permeable soils and native vegetation, and encouraging use of permeable pavements and surfaces, where appropriate. FP-6: Property owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of stormwater management facilities and pollution control structures which are located within the boundaries of their property. The City shall monitor and enforce this maintenance requirement and shall be responsible for the maintenance of facilities within City owned property and public right of ways. The City will work with property owners and maintenance providers to see that the waste associated with the maintenance of these facilities and structures is disposed of properly. FP-7: Where feasible, stormwater facilities, such as retention and detention ponds, should be designed to provide supplemental benefits, such as wildlife habitat, water quality treatment, and passive recreation. FP-8: Increase the Public’s knowledge of stormwater runoff issues and support public involvement in the City’s stormwater management program. FP-9: Cooperate with the Department of Ecology and neighboring jurisdictions, including participation in regional forums and committees, to improve regional surface water management and resolve related inter- jurisdictional concerns. PROGRAM AREA 2: Water Quality The water quality program area is designed to meet Goals A & C by setting forth the following policies: WQ-1: Implement the required provisions of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal stormwater Permit, issued by the Department of Ecology to protect receiving water quality from degradation from runoff from the City’s municipal stormwater system. WQ-2: Comply with other all applicable, relevant, and appropriates requirements from the Federal, state, and local governments related to water quality. WQ-3: Protect water quality by implementing best management practices for runoff treatment for new development and redevelopment projects. Additional requirements which are more restrictive than this general policy may apply in the case of substantial redevelopment of parcels which were originally developed under non-existent or outdated stormwater control standards and contain large areas of impervious surfaces, have a high percentage of total impervious surfaces, or have identified drainage or water quality problems. WQ-4: Promote the use of Low Impact Development techniques in site planning and Best Management Practices Implementation to the extent feasible to mitigate the effects of development and redevelopment on water quality. WQ-6: Protect water quality through the continuation and possible expansion of the street sweeping program. WQ-7: Protect water quality by educating citizens about proper waste disposal and eliminating pollutants that enter the stormwater system as a result of lawn and garden maintenance, car cleaning or maintenance, roof cleaning or maintenance, or direct disposal into storm drains. Packet Page 300 of 343 WQ-8: Property owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of stormwater management facilities and pollution control structures which are located within the boundaries of their property. The City shall monitor and enforce this maintenance requirement and shall be responsible for the maintenance of facilities within City owned property and public right of ways. The City will work with property owners and maintenance providers to see that the waste associated with the maintenance of these facilities and structures is disposed of properly. WQ-9: Cooperate with the Department of Ecology and neighboring jurisdictions, including participation in regional forums and committees, to improve regional surface water quality issues solve related inter- jurisdictional concerns. PROGRAM AREA 3: Aquatic Habitat The Aquatic Habitat program area is designed to meet Goals A, B & C by setting forth the following policies: AH-1: Comply with all applicable, relevant, and appropriates requirements from the Federal, state, and local governments related to aquatic habitat. AH-2: Actively participate in regional species protection efforts, including salmon habitat protection and restoration. AH-3: Protect critical wildlife habitat, such as wetlands, including habitats or species that have been identified as priority species or priority habitats by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, from the negative affects of uncontrolled stormwater runoff form development and redevelopment. Habitats and species of local importance will also be protected in this manner. AH-4: If wetlands are used as part of a storm drainage system, assure that water level fluctuations will be similar to fluctuations under natural conditions and that water quality standards are met prior to discharging stormwater into a wetland. AH-5: Habitat restoration efforts should focus on those areas that will result in the greatest benefit to the resource and that have been identified by the City as priority for restoration. The restoration of the Edmonds Marsh shall be a priority. AH-6: The City should develop basin stewardship and education programs to prevent surface water impacts and to identify opportunities for restoration. The following issues should be considered when formulating plans and implementing projects which have the potential to impact stream basins: public access, respect for private property, restoration of the feature to a more natural state, retention of native vegetation, improvement of surface water management in the basin, improvement of fish habitat and channel substrate, and streambank stabilization. AH-7: Streams shall not be permanently altered except for:  Habitat restoration;  Water quality restoration;  Flood protection;  Correction to bank erosion;  Road crossings when alternative routes are not feasible; or  Private driveway crossings when it is the only means of access. Packet Page 301 of 343 Alterations, other than habitat improvements, should only occur when it is the only means feasible and should be the minimum necessary. Any alteration to a stream should result in a net improvement to habitat and streams should be encouraged to return to natural channel migration patterns, where feasible. In cases where stream alteration is consistent with this policy, channel stabilization techniques shall generally be preferred over culverting. AH-8: Identify surface water features with restoration potential and attempt to obtain citizen involvement and community consensus on any future attempt to restore features which have been altered. Restoration efforts may include the daylighting of streams which have been diverted into underground pipes or culverts. AH-9: Solutions to stream habitat problems should focus on those types of problems that first protect and preserve existing habitat, then enhance and expand habitat in areas where wild anadromous fish are present, and lastly, enhance and expand habitat in areas where other wild fish are present. AH-10: The City shall work with citizens and watershed interest groups, and cooperate with King County, Snohomish County, and other local governments, regional governments, state agencies, and Indian tribes in developing and implementing watershed action plans and other types of basin plans for basins which include or are upstream or downstream from the City. PROGRAM AREA 4: Stormwater Utility Funding The Stormwater Utility Funding program area is designed to meet Goals A, B, C & D by setting forth the following policies: SWUF-1: The utility will have primary authority and responsibility for funding the implementation the City’s Comprehensive Surface and Stormwater Management Plan, including:  Responsibilities for planning, design, construction, maintenance, administration, and operation of all city storm and surface water facilities,  Establishing standards for design, construction, and maintenance of improvements on private property where these may affect storm and surface water management, and  Implementation of water quality and aquatic habitat policies. SWUF-2: All parcels in the City will be charged a fee as set by the City Council that will be used to fund stormwater programs detailed in the Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan. The rate will be based on the number of Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) on each parcel. One ESU shall represent 3,000 square feet of impervious area. All zoning types except single family residential shall be charged based on the actual impervious surface area on the parcel at the rate defined by City Council per one ESU. The minimum charge shall be one ESU. SWUF-3: Each single family parcel shall be charged the rate for one ESU, regardless of the actual impervious surface area on the parcel. The Public Works Director, may impose a fee larger than one ESU on any single family parcel causing an unreasonable burden on the storm of surface water system. SWUF-4: Acknowledge that all residents benefit from using the paved (impervious) surfaces within the City’s right-of-ways and these impervious surfaces create a significant burden and cost to the City’s stormwater system that must be adequately funded to maintain in working order and to comply with applicable Federal, state and local water quality regulations. Packet Page 302 of 343 DRAFT January 29, 2010 5 SWUF-5: In addition to any other charge prescribed by this chapter, a stormwater management system development charge shall be paid prior to the issuance of any building permit or development permit issued under the Edmonds Community Development Code (“permit”) by the owner of any property, residential dwelling unit, or other structure that may hereafter be constructed in the city which benefits from the stormwater utility system constructed by the city. The stormwater management system development charge shall be set by City Council based on the number of ESU added to or created by the permit. SWUF-6: The City’s Public Works Director shall make adjustments to the said utility rates in an accordance with the following provisions:  Upon written application, a customer may request review said utility fee. The applicant shall state the specific conditions and/or facilities on the site which the applicant feels warrants adjustment of the rate as applied to the property.  The Public Works director shall have the authority to increase or decrease rates up to 50 percent of the level set by City Council. Factors personal to the property owner, such as ability to pay (, shall not be considered. The sole criteria for adjusting the rate shall be a determination that the physical characteristics of the site and in particular the stormwater detention, retention and/or treatment facilities as installed thereon by the owners, or lack thereof, have significantly: o Increased the burden which the property places upon the City’s stormwater utility (in the event of an increase) or o Decreased the burden (in the event of a decrease) by providing additional benefits over and above those which the average property places upon the utility through on-site improvements including but not limited to on-site pollution control mechanisms or technologies which relate to water quality and the property’s impact upon the city’s stormwater management system. SWUF-7: If the owner of a single family parcel qualifies for a “low income senior citizen exemption” as determined by the County Assessor under RCW 84.36.381 is exempt paying from said utility fee as long as the owner remains a “low income senior citizen.” It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to demonstrate qualifications for this fee exemption. SWUF-8: The City shall actively seek outside funding to leverage or complement utility funds in order to implement the City’s Comprehensive Surface and Stormwater Management Plan such as:  Local, state and federal grants  Loans such as from the Public Works Trust Fund  Future bond measures  Other cross-jurisdictional funding mechanisms Packet Page 303 of 343 AM-2779 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, B: Implement Sustainable Purchasing Practices Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title B. Implement Sustainable Purchasing Practices (i.e., best value vs. best price contract language); Green Power Purchase by City Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3B bellingham green power initiative Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:13 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 09:51 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 304 of 343 Clare FogelsongManagerEnvironmental ResourcesCity of BellinghamBen RupertResource Conservation ManagementCity of BellinghamPacket Page 305 of 343 Overview•Partnership between the City of Bellingham, PSE and Sustainable Connections (a Bellingham based, nonprofit, business network).•Purpose:Increase participation in PSE’s Green Power program•Goal:50 new businesses and 1000 new residential customers.•To begin September 2006 and culminate Earth Day 2007. Packet Page 306 of 343 Overview (Continued)•Projected Result:The reduction of about 6,500 metric tonnes of CO2emissions per year. •PSE will fund a renewable energy demonstration project in Bellingham •Campaign funded by a grant from the NW Clean Air Agency and from PSE’s Green Power marketing budget.Packet Page 307 of 343 Overview (Continued)•Actual Result:The reduction of about 37,690 metric tonnes of CO2emissions per year!•PSE has funded two renewable energy demonstration projects in Bellingham •2312 residential customers, 127 businesses, and 4 large volume customers signed up for green power during the challenge.Packet Page 308 of 343 Our Strategy•Emphasize founding business partners •Communicate the Challenge through a wide variety of media: mailings, print ads, radio, local access cable and banners•Grassroots Organizing•Neighborhood Challenge•City LeadershipPacket Page 309 of 343 Our StrategyThis promotional sign, including a tare-off on-the-spot Green Power sign-up form, was prominently displayed by many local merchants and at community events, allowing folks to take the challenge immediately.Packet Page 310 of 343 Our StrategyWe also utilized a promotional post-card as a bill-insert with local electrical bills highlighting the GPCC and rewards for participation.Packet Page 311 of 343 Keeping Energy Dollars Local•Most of PSE’s sources for green tags are in Washington state, all are in the Pacific Northwest. •Whatcom county has the state’s first single-farm anaerobic digester:•Normal output 300 kW (potential to 450 kW)•PSE purchases all the electricity•PSE purchases all of the green tags•Creating an explicit link between local power consumption and local power productionPacket Page 312 of 343 Leading by Example•Adopting the Mayors recommendation, the Bellingham City Council voted unanimously to begin purchasing 100% of electricity for municipal operations from the Green Power Program.•Results:•Investment by the City in 25 million kWh/year of renewable energy credits•Elimination of about 12,000 metric tonnes of CO2emissions•Originally established Bellingham as the largest 100% Green Power purchaser in the Partnership.•Promoted the City of Bellingham’s leadership role in the community.Packet Page 313 of 343 Recycling Our Clean Energy Tax Dollars•Bellingham collects a 6% utility tax•Increased spending on electricity increases the City’s revenues•WWU buys 100% Green Power. This will increase City revenues by approximately $22,000/year•City’s purchase increases revenues by about $16,000/year•Residential purchases increase revenues by about $13,000/year. •These dollars return to the City’s General FundPacket Page 314 of 343 Funding Renewable Energy•Green Power costs will come from the fund that pays for electricity.•Originally estimated $257,000 total increase in utility bills•Because the Green Power Community Challenge was so successful, Puget Sound Energy extended a substantially reduced bulk Green Power rate to all Bellingham area customers.•The City only spent roughly $150,000 additional on 100% Green Power in 2007.•Utility Tax revenues have gone up•Green Power premiums•Rate increases for conventional energyPacket Page 315 of 343 AchievementsFive EPA-provided signs like the one above have been located at gateway points to the Bellingham community.Packet Page 316 of 343 Thank YouClare FogelsongEnvironmental Resources ManagerCity of Bellinghamcfogelsong@cob.org360-778-7900Benjamin RupertResource Conservation ManagementCity of Bellinghambupert@cob.org360-778-7900Packet Page 317 of 343 AM-2780 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, C. Green Buildings - Implement LEED Standards Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title C. Green Buildings - Implement LEED Standards for New Construction, Incentivize Green Remodels, Other Code Rewrites Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3C Green building code Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 02:13 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:22 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 09:59 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 318 of 343 1. Short title. This chapter shall be known as the “green building practices ordinance.” 2. Purpose. The city recognizes that building construction, maintenance and operations consume resources which have a direct impact on the public welfare and the natural environment. Therefore, it is the purpose of this chapter to: A. Enhance the public welfare and assure that civic and private sector development is consistent with the city’s desire to create a more sustainable community by incorporating green building measures into the design, construction, and maintenance of buildings; B. Improve the health of residents, visitors, and workers by counteracting negative environmental impacts associated with building construction and occupation; C. Promote development that fosters sustainable sites, improves energy and resource efficiency, decreases waste and pollution generation, and improves the health and productivity of a building’s occupants over the life of the building. 3. Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and terms are defined as follows: A. “Applicant” means any individual, person, firm, limited liability company, association, partnership, political subdivision, government agency, municipality, industry, public or private corporation, or any other entity filing an application in compliance with this chapter who is: 1. The owner or lessee of property; 2. A party who has contracted to purchase property contingent upon that party’s ability to acquire the necessary approvals required for that action in compliance with the zoning code, and who presents written authorization from the property owner to file an application with the city; or 3. The agent of either of the above who presents written authorization from the property owner to file an application with the city. B. “Building” means any structure used for support or shelter of any use or occupancy, as defined in the Washington State Building Code. C. “City” means the city of Edmonds. D. “City building” means a building which was built for use by the city or which is located on city-owned land. E. “Construction” means the building of any building or structure or any portion thereof. F. “Green building compliance official” means the director of planning and development or his/her designee. G. “Gross floor area” means the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the inside face of the exterior walls including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet, but excluding area used exclusively for vehicle parking or loading. H. “LEEDTM accredited professional” means a person who is recognized by the United States Green Building Council as having the knowledge and skills necessary to participate in the design process, to support and encourage integrated design, and to streamline the LEEDTM project application and certification process. Packet Page 319 of 343 I. “LEEDTM’s Green Building Rating System (Rating System)” means the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System approved by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) and as that Rating System may be amended from time to time by the USGBC. J. “LEEDTM’s checklist” means the credit and point checklists developed by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System for measuring the sustainability, efficiency, and environmental soundness of a building. K. “Mixed-use project” shall have the definition as set forth in the city’s zoning code. L. “Multi-family residential” shall have the definition as set forth in the city’s zoning code. M “Tenant improvement” means any improvement which requires a permit pursuant to the Edmonds Building Code. 4. Applicability. A. Projects meeting the following thresholds shall comply with the provisions of this chapter: 1. City buildings of 10,000 square feet or more of new gross floor area; 2. Nonresidential buildings of 10,000 square feet or more of new gross floor area; 3. Tenant improvements of 10,000 square feet or more of new gross floor area and requiring a building permit as determined by the building official or designee; 4. Mixed-use projects and multi-family residential projects that include a residential building which has three stories in height, or more, of new construction. 5. Standards for compliance. A. The city shall adopt by reference the United States Green Building Council LEEDTM (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Building Rating System as the standard for which a project shall be measured as a green building. The specific actions required for project compliance with this chapter are as follows: 1. All applicable projects are required to retain the services of a LEEDTM accredited professional and complete LEEDTM project registration prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. All applicable projects shall submit a LEEDTM checklist and supporting documentation indicating points meeting at a minimum LEEDTM “certified” level incorporated into documentation for a building permit. The LEEDTM checklist shall be prepared, signed, and dated by the project LEEDTM accredited professional. All building documents shall indicate in the general notes and/or individual detail drawings, where feasible, the green building measures employed to attain the applicable LEEDTM rating. 3. Applicable city buildings are required to attain LEEDTM certification and meet, at a minimum, LEEDTM certified level. 4. Building commissioning, although specified as a prerequisite for LEEDTM certification, is not required for applicable projects under this chapter except for city buildings. Applicants are encouraged to verify that fundamental building systems are designed, installed, and calibrated to operate as intended. 6. Compliance. Packet Page 320 of 343 Bernheim draft building code October 2007 draft. 3 3 The green building compliance official shall: A. Verify LEEDTM project registration and review the required LEEDTM checklist and supporting documentation prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. B. Verify that the building measures and provisions indicated on the project LEEDTM checklist and on the supporting approved documentation, including approved plan sets, are being implemented at foundation inspection, framing inspection, and prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. C. Conduct any inspection as needed to ensure compliance with this chapter. 7. Penalties and administrative remedies. A. If, as a result of any inspection, the green building compliance official determines that the applicable project does not comply with the approved documentation, a stop work order may be issued. At the discretion of the green building compliance official, such a stop work order may apply to the portion of the project impacted by noncompliance or to the entire project. The stop work order shall remain in effect until the green building compliance official determines that the project is in compliance with the requirements of this chapter or meets the requirements of subsection B of this section. B. If the green building compliance official determines that the applicable project has not met the requirements of the LEEDTM checklist, as set forth in Section 6 of this chapter, he or she shall determine on a case-by-case basis whether the applicant has made a good faith effort to comply with this chapter. In making this determination, the green building compliance official shall consider the availability of markets for materials to be recycled, the availability of green building materials and technologies, and the documented efforts of the applicant to comply with this chapter. The green building compliance official may require additional reasonable green building measures be included in the operation of the covered project to mitigate the failure to comply fully with this chapter. Packet Page 321 of 343 AM-2781 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, E. Car Free Day Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title E. Car Free Day, Parking Space Decommissioning, Electric Car Rally, Unlicense Day Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3E Car free day Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:29 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 01:42 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 10:04 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 322 of 343 Turn a Parking Spot into a PARK(ing) Space! PARK(ing) Assembly Manual Thank you for taking an interest in building a PARK(ing) space in your local urban environment. Rebar wishes to support your endeavor in whatever way possible, and have developed this handy guide to help you. Please note: you may replicate PARK(ing) for non-commercial purposes only. Concept and materials copyright © 2005 by Rebar. www.rebargroup.org PART I - Choosing the Spot Find a metered parking spot in an ideal sunny location for people to stop, rest, relax, and do nothing. Check to see if your city planning agency (or other ope n space advocacy group) has a map of areas underserved by public open space. Make contacts! You may be surprised how receptive people are to your PARK(ing) idea. Other things to consider about the location are: 1. Type of metered space: is it a 2-hour spot or a 1/2 hour drop-off spot. We d o not suggest “No-Stopping” zones, loading zones or commuter lanes. 2. People you are trying to serve: downtown office workers, tourists, the down and out, or the high-rollers. When will they be around to see and use th e space? 3. Surveillance: are there nearby spots for you or your friends to take pictures or video of the installation? 4. Other environmental conditions: sun, shade, wind, weather, traffic, construction. PART II - Building Materials The fundamental elements of a good outdoor public space are seating, shade, a place to watch people and view scenery, and a sense of being in nature. 1 Packet Page 323 of 343 For Rebar’s first PARK(ing), we installed 200 sq. ft of lawn, a 24" box/15' tall tree, a park bench and an enclosing boundary. We also produced signs to indicate to the public that this space was created for their use and enjoyment and to invite them to feed the meter to keep the PARK open. 1. Groundcover: Even a small piece of lawn can transform the hard concrete or asphalt into a soft, green oasis. Sod is available at many garden centers for around $2.00 for a 1 ft x 5 ft roll. Be sure to place a tarp under the sod to prevent absorption of chemicals from the roadway into the sod’s matting. Other bits of nature that may work are moss, potted plants, sand, or anything that will feel good to bare feet. 2. Seating: The more seating you provide, the greater the chance of unplanned interaction among PARK(ing) visitors. Good used park benches can be obtained on the Internet or rented from a film/theatre prop rental shop. Also, don’t be afraid to utilize “Big Box” retailers with liberal return policies – perhaps you can buy a bench for your PARK(ing) and return it for a full refund when you are finished. 3. Shade: Some nurseries will lease trees by the day or week. Check with your local nursery to find a sturdy tree with abundant foliage for shade. Bamboo or a large indoor plant may work in your climate. Choose a tree you will be able to move and manage easily. 4. Enclosure: Plastic bollards linked with rope (AKA traffic tubes, available here for about $15/each) potted plants, or any self-supporting boundary is important to provide a sense of enclosure and safety for visitors to your PARK(ing) space. 5. Signs: indicating that this space has been transformed from a parking spot to a PARK(ing) space for public enjoyment and inviting visitors to feed the meter. 6. Spare change: Don't forget to bring change to feed the meter to get things rolling before your visitors arrive. 7. Please make sure you have a plan to reuse, recycle, or donate the materials - such as the sod and tree - after your PARK(ing) project is complete! Concept and materials copyright © 2005 by Rebar. PART III – Planning the Event Things you should consider organizing in advance are: 1. Sourcing materials like tree, lawn and bench at least a week or two in advance; 2. Transportation for the materials to and from the site; 3. Friends or collaborators to arrive early at the site to hold a space and to help you setup and cleanup; 4. People to photograph/document the event; 5. A plan for dealing with police officers, traffic enforcement personnel, or people angry about you occupying a parking space. Keep in mind that you are acting in the public interest to add to the health, comfort, and vitality of your city. We recommend appealing to law enforcement’s sense of civic pride versus antagonizing them. 6. A place to donate the materials (sod and tree) when the project is over. PART IV – Installation 2 Packet Page 324 of 343 Arrive early to secure your ideal space. A couple of strategies for installing PARK(ing) in heavy traffic are to: (1) Obtain two or more spots. One spot to temporarily park your transport vehicle and one (or more) for PARK(ing); (2) Alternatively, pull up alongside your spot. Turn on your blinkers, and place traffic safety cones or saw horses for safe unloading. 1. Begin feeding the meter. 2. Unload the turf or groundcover. Place the first turf roll against the curb, unroll, and proceed from there. Pruning clippers are handy to trim the turf for a perfect fit. Press the turf edges together snugly to create a seamless lawn. 3. Unload the tree. 24" box trees are VERY heavy and will require 3-4 people to move safely and efficiently. Site the tree so that it will provide a bit of shade for the duration of your installation. 4. Place the seating, set up the boundary, then place your signs inviting the public enjoy the PARK you have just created for them. 5. Now sit back, relax and enjoy! People may be profoundly indifferent, nonchalant, curious or overwhelmingly excited by your PARK. You may wish to provide them with an explanatory flyer or an email, website or mailing address to contact you for more information. Don't forget to feed the meter! Concept and materials copyright © 2005 by Rebar. PART V – Clean-Up 1. Once the meter expires, the sun has gone behind a building, or you have been asked to leave by the police or traffic authorities, load your tree, roll up the turf, and pick up the bench. Carefully sweep up any dirt or debris, and then dismantle the boundary structure. If you are returning a tree to the nursery, take care not to damage it while loading. 2. Ideally you have lined up a place to donate any materials that you don't plan to keep or reuse. Once you have dropped off all the materials, returned equipment, and cleaned up, take the time to thank all of your friends and collaborators. PART VI - Getting the Word Out If you take pictures or video of your PARK(ing), please send them to Rebar at: parking@rebargroup.org. We will post pictures and stories about your PARK(ing) project on the Rebar site, and provide a link to your local organization/website. We would also like to incorporate your video into a larger documentary project on the nascent PARK(ing) movement. Please email us for more information on the documentary. Now get out there and start PARK(ing)! 3 Packet Page 325 of 343 AM-2782 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, F. Styrofoam Ban Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title F. Styrofoam Ban Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3F Styrofoam Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:29 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 01:42 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 10:05 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 326 of 343 Food Container Fact Sheet The City of Seattle has banned the use of expanded polystyrene (EPS, sometimes called “Styrofoam”) food service containers and cups in all restaurants. When does the ban take effect? January 1, 2009 What are typical products made out of EPS? “Clamshells,” bowls, plates, and beverage cups are typical products. What should my business do? You must stop using EPS food service products by January 1, 2009. You may change to any alternative products, but the City recommends switching to compostable materials. You must change to recyclable plastic or compostable food service products, including lids and utensils, by July 1, 2010. Why switch to compostable products? In addition to the negative environmental impacts of EPS, Seattle wants to compost as much food waste as possible. Compostable products allow easy one-step disposal of food waste and service ware into your compost bin. Where can I find substitute products? You will find information and compostable alternatives wherever you buy food service products. If you choose to compost, you must use products that are approved compostable by the City of Seattle and Cedar Grove Composting. Learn more at www.resourceventure.org/plasticfoamban or (206) 343-8505 9/2008Packet Page 327 of 343 AM-2783 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, G. Lighting Code/Dark Skies Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title G. Lighting Code/Dark Skies Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3G dark skies Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:29 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 01:42 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 02:04 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 10:06 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 328 of 343 IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall DDaarrkk--SSkkyy AAssssoocciiaattiioonn The Nightscape Authority 3225 North First Avenue  Tucson, AZ 85719  USA (phone) + 1 (520) 293 3918  (fax) +1 (520) 293 3192 ida@darksky.org  www.darksky.org Simple Guidelines for Lighting Regulations for Small Communities, Urban Neighborhoods, and Subdivisions The purpose of the regulation is to: Permit reasonable uses of outdoor lighting for nighttime safety, utility, security, and enjoyment while preserving the ambiance of the night; Curtail and reverse any degradation of the nighttime visual environment and the night sky; Minimize glare and obtrusive light by limiting outdoor lighting that is misdirected, excessive, or unnecessary; Conserve energy and resources to the greatest extent possible; Help protect the natural environment from the damaging effects of night lighting. All outdoor lighting fixtures (luminaires) shall be installed in conformance with this Regulation and with the provisions of the Building Code, the Electrical Code, and the Sign Code, as applicable and under permit and inspection, if such is required. Comment: Practical Considerations: 1. The idea that more light always results in better safety and security is a myth. One needs only the right amount of light, in the right place, at the right time. More light often means wasted light and energy. 2. Use the lowest wattage of lamp that is feasible. The maximum wattage for most commercial applications should be 250 watts of high intensity discharge lighting should be considered the maximum, but less is usually sufficient. 3. Whenever possible, turn off the lights or use motion sensor controlled lighting. 4. Incorporate curfews (i.e. turn lights off automatically after a certain hour when businesses close or traffic is minimal). This is an easy and fast way to initiate dark sky practices. Maximum Lamp Wattage and Required Luminaire or Lamp Shielding: All lighting installations shall be designed and installed to be fully shielded (full cutoff), except as in exceptions below, and shall have a maximum lamp wattage of 250 watts HID (or lumen equivalent) for commercial lighting, 100 watts incandescent, and 26 watts compact fluorescent for residential lighting (or approximately 1,600 lumens). In residential areas, light should be shielded such that the lamp itself or the lamp image is not directly visible outside the property perimeter. Lighting that is exempt from these regulations: 1. Lighting in swimming pools and other water features governed by Article 680 of the National Electrical Code. 2. Exit signs and other illumination required by building codes. 3. Lighting for stairs and ramps, as required by the building code. 4. Signs are regulated by the sign code, but all sign lighting is recommended to be fully shielded. 5. Holiday and temporary lighting (less than thirty days use in any one year). Packet Page 329 of 343 IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall DDaarrkk--SSkkyy AAssssoocciiaattiioonn The Nightscape Authority 3225 North First Avenue  Tucson, AZ 85719  USA (phone) + 1 (520) 293 3918  (fax) +1 (520) 293 3192 ida@darksky.org  www.darksky.org 6. Football, baseball, and softball field lighting; only with permit from the authority recognizing that steps have been taken to minimize glare and light trespass, and utilize sensible curfews. 7. Low voltage landscape lighting, but such lighting should be shielded in such a way as to eliminate glare and light trespass. Additional requirements: Lighting attached to single-family home structures should not exceed the height of the eave. Residential pole height restrictions can be considered to control light trespass on adjacent properties. Notes: 1. The general belief that more light means better safety and security is just a myth. All that is needed is the right amount, in the right place, at the right time. More light just means wasted light and energy. 2. Use the lowest wattage of lamp as possible. For cost saving purposes, consider compact fluorescent lamps rather than incandescent, as they use much less energy and have a much longer lifetime. 3. Whenever possible, turn off the lights. Definitions: Glare: Intense and blinding light. Causes visual discomfort or disability. Landscape lighting: Luminaries mounted in or at grade (but not more than 3 feet above grade) and used solely for landscape rather than any area lighting. Obtrusive light: Spill light that causes glare, annoyance, discomfort, or loss of visual ability. Light Pollution. Luminaire (light fixture): A complete lighting unit consisting of one or more electric lamps, the lamp holder, any reflector or lens, ballast (if any), and any other components and accessories. Fully shielded (full cutoff) luminaire: A luminaire emitting no light above the horizontal plane. Spill light: Light from a lighting installation that falls outside of the boundaries of the property on which it is located. Usually results in obtrusive light. Additional Resources for Establishing Outdoor Lighting Guidelines 1. Model Lighting Ordinance (MLO) 2. Recommended Outdoor Lighting Zones 3. IDA Lighting Code Handbook 4. Directory of Ordinances and Other Regulations 5. Glossary of Basic lighting Terms and Definitions Packet Page 330 of 343 AM-2784 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 3, H. Tree Ordinance Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Steve Bernheim Time: Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title H. Tree Ordinance, Tree City, Public Tree/ Private Tree Preservation, Pedestrian Safety, Keep Healthy Trees, Address Real Dangers, Promote Green Reputation; Review Tree Plan Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Saturday Session 3 Topic 3H tree ordinance Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 12:00 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 02/01/2010 12:07 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 02/01/2010 01:18 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 01/29/2010 10:08 AM Final Approval Date: 02/01/2010 Packet Page 331 of 343 1.010 Purpose and intent. It is the purpose and intent of this chapter to: A. Implement the goals and policies of Edmonds’s Comprehensive Plan; B. To preserve and enhance Edmonds's physical and aesthetic character by preventing untimely and indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees; C. To protect trees on undeveloped sites that are not undergoing development by not allowing tree removal except in hazardous situations, to prevent premature loss of trees so their retention may be considered during the development review and approval process; D. To reward tree protection efforts by granting flexibility for certain development standards, and to promote site planning and horticultural practices that are consistent with the reasonable use of property; E. To protect exceptional trees because of their unique historical, ecological, or aesthetic value and to require flexibility in design to protect exceptional trees; F. To provide the option of modifying development standards to protect trees over two (2) feet in diameter in the same manner that modification of development standards is required for exceptional trees; G. To encourage retention of trees over six (6) inches in diameter through the design review and other processes for larger projects, through education concerning the value of retaining trees, and by not permitting their removal on undeveloped land prior to development permit review. H. To protect landmark trees and to establish a register of these trees because Landmark trees are irreplaceable by any means, may be associated with historic figures, events, or properties; or be rare or unusual species; or they may have aesthetic value worthy of protection for the health and general welfare of the residents of this city. I. To provide for the preservation and proper maintenance of landmark trees located in Edmonds, to minimize disturbance to the trees themselves, and to prevent other environmental damage from erosion or destruction of wildlife habitat and to provide greenhouse gas protection and to help absorb excess carbon emissions; and J. To protect the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of this city, and K. To enhance storm water management. tion(s). Packet Page 332 of 343 AM-2751 Saturday, Session 3, Topic 5: Yost Pool Future Planning Edmonds City Council Retreat Date:02/05/2010 Submitted By:Brian McIntosh Time: Department:Parks and Recreation Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Topic 5: Yost Pool Future Planning (30 Minutes) Recommendation from Mayor and Staff For discussion at the City Council Retreat. Previous Council Action On October 28, 2008 City Council commissioned a feasibility study in regard to Edmond's aquatic future. The feasibility study was presented by the consultant, NAC/Architecture, on August 25, 2009. Narrative For discussion, former City Councilmember and Yost Pool supporter Dick Van Hollebeke will make a short presentation in regard to the current situation at Yost Pool and the possibility of moving forward with a new facility in the future. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Yost Pool Future Planning Link: Aquatics Feasibility Study Executive Summary Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/26/2010 02:45 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/26/2010 02:47 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/27/2010 02:59 PM APRV Form Started By: Brian McIntosh Started On: 01/22/2010 11:02 AM Final Approval Date: 01/27/2010 Packet Page 333 of 343 YOST POOL FUTURE PLANNINGPacket Page 334 of 343 Aquatic Trends• Family Aquatic Centers• Competitive Swimming/Diving• Zero Depth• Spray Play Features• Wellness & Therapy• Participatory Climbable Water Play Structures• Flow Channel• Activity Zone• Water SlidesPacket Page 335 of 343 Project cost budget:$16,700,000Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $72.61 (Monthly impact $6.05)Annual operation subsidy:$150,000-$250,000Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $9-$15 (Monthly impact $0.75-$1.25)Annual economic benefits:$600,000-$1,000,000Recommended Concept~ Outdoor & indoor pools at Yost Park•Retains beautiful natural setting atYost Park•Topography & trees•Easy access from neighborhoods•New year-round pool•New therapy pool & whirlpool•New outdoor leisure poolClimbable water play structuresFlow channelActivity zoneWater slidesPacket Page 336 of 343 Survey indicates 71% would support year-round poolPacket Page 337 of 343 Packet Page 338 of 343 Now is the time to move forward•Feasibility study complete•Citizen’s survey confirms support•Permanent economic benefit•Low bond rates•Favorable construction climate•Yost Pool is nearing the end of its life expectancyAuthorize a ballot measure for November 2010Packet Page 339 of 343 AQUATICS FEASIBILITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Packet Page 340 of 343 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Yost Pool has been a popular amenity for the Edmonds community for over 35 years. Yost Park is a beautiful natural setting for the pool and many citizens have passionate memories of Yost Pool and feel a strong attachment to this venue. Yost Pool has been well-maintained so the typical pool-user is not even aware of many problems with the facility. However, the pool does show signs of deterioration and parts for the pool’s failing mechanical systems are no longer available. Park and Recreation staff has actually fabricated some replacement parts when needed. Many users do notice that pool house is showing its age, the facility is not ADA accessible and that there is limited parking. The purpose for this study is to discover the desires for an aquatic center in the City of Edmonds. Knowing that Yost Pool is nearing the end of its life expectancy, what should be done? What are the potential options for an aquatic center that respond to the desires of the community? The intent of this report is to document the information discovered in a clear and focused manner to allow the City of Edmonds to make informed decisions regarding the next steps in planning for the future of aquatics. Process In order to determine the aquatic needs and desires, the consultant team conducted an evaluation of the existing Yost Pool and completed a market analysis of Edmonds’ primary, secondary and tertiary service areas. The analysis concludes that there a significant number of market opportunities f or new or expanded aquatic facilities in Edmonds. Two public meetings were held and the Study Committee met separately with interested stakeholders. Although stakeholders saw advantages to an aquatics facility near the waterfront in Edmonds, those attending the public meetings felt very strongly about keeping an aquatic facility at Yost Park. The City also hired Leisure Vision to conduct a statistically valid survey regarding aquatic options for the Edmonds community. A key finding from the survey was an overwhelming desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds. In the midst of the study, the City was forced to address severe financial issues that were forecasted. As a result of this fiscal crisis, it was proposed that Yost Pool would be closed for the upcoming season. Concerned citizens stepped forward and worked with the City to develop cost savings plans and raise funds to successfully keep the pool open. Despite the distraction of the potential pool closure, focus of the aquatic study remained on planning for the future of aquatics. This issue did highlight the vulnerability of aquatics in Edmonds and the need for long-range planning to avoid the closure of the pool in the future. Site Three potential sites, including Yost Park, were identified as a potential location for a new aquatics facility and a Site Analysis was conducted for each site. The site of the Antique Mall near the waterfront was an early consideration as a potential site. However, the owner of Harbor Square Athletic Club (HSAC) became aware of the study and indicated an interest in a partnership with the City to develop a new aquatic facility on property being leased by HSAC. As a result, the focus for a site near the waterfront was shifted to the Harbor Square site. The former Woodway High School was evaluated as a level school site, but the School District indicated that this site was currently fully utilized for school district uses and would not be available for the development of an aquatics facility at this time. Although the site analysis indicates Yost Park may not be the ideal physical site for an aquatic facility, it became apparent through the course of the study that any proposal without a pool at Yost Park would face vocal opposition. Packet Page 341 of 343 Options Utilizing all the information gathered throughout the study, four concept options were developed by the consultant team with input from the Study Committee. Both the public meeting and the survey indicated that support for an aquatics venue at Yost Park was very strong. The survey also illustrated the overwhelming desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds. These first four concepts which addressed these issues were more fully developed. Two additional options were added as a result of input received at the second public meeting. Concept options are as follows: Option 1- Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $8,200,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $35.51 Annual operation cost estimate: $0-$50,000 Option 2- Indoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $21,900,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $95.40 Annual operation cost estimate: $200,000-$300,000 Option 3- Indoor lap and warm-water wellness pools and outdoor recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $16,700,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $72.61 Annual operation cost estimate: $150,000-$250,000 Option 4 plus Option 1- Indoor pool and small outdoor pool in partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $17,400,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $75.49 Annual operation cost estimate: $25,000-$125,000 Option 5- At the second public meeting, a few of those attending the meeting requested the addition of a fifth option for consideration. That option was for a replacement of the existing poolhouse (primarily to address ADA access issues with the existing two-story facility) and renovation of the existing Yost Pool. This would essentially create a new version of what exists at Yost Park today. The estimated project budget for this option is approximately $5,000,000. With a renovation, Yost Pool would continue to operate at a similar cost deficit as it does currently and would be vulnerable to closure as it was in the 2009 season with the City’s budget issues. This concept did not receive much support in the informal “vote” and was not further developed. Option 6- With this concept, there would be no changes. Yost Pool would remain as it is today with required maintenance continuing. Since Yost Pool is already over 35 years old, it is likely that mounting repair and maintenance costs would ultimately force its closure within a limited number of years. As an example Yost Pool will need to be re-plastered (an every 10 years maintenance project) no later than 2011 at a cost of $80,000 - $100,000. Packet Page 342 of 343 Recommendations Based on the survey results, input from the public meetings and other relevant information accumulated as part of this study, it appears that Option 3 provides the best balance for the City of Edmonds. Option 3 provides an outdoor opportunity for the busiest time of year that will be a different experience from neighbors Mountlake Terrace and the renovation in progress at Lynnwood that both have indoor only pools. It also provides an indoor year-round pool still in the park setting and housed at the same site. Dedicated lap swimmers are provided a venue that allows year-round swimming. A couple of lap lanes would be included in the outdoor recreation pool to allow lap swimming outdoors in the idyllic Yost Park setting, however the water temperature of the recreation pool will be too warm for some lap swimmers. From virtually all input received, there was an overwhelming desire to retain an aquatic facility at Yost Park…any proposal that does not include a pool at Yost Park would face strong opposition. A larger aquatic facility at Yost Park and the associated parking will impact the park site and may create some opposition , although that opposition was not expressed in the course of this study except by few who advocated “no change”. Although the partnership with HSAC explored with Option 4 is intriguing and has some advantages, it was not strongly supported. This potential partnership has many complexities and complications to resolve and without detailed answers there was some apprehension with this concept that, if pursued, likely would take significant time to resolve to the satisfaction of both the City and HSAC. There is compelling rationale for Option 1 as a secondary recommendation. It would be the only outdoor facility (lap plus recreation swimming) in the service area, since both Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace have indoor pools. It has a lower capital cost. Depending on the timing of a proposal and the economy this may be more appealing to taxpayers. It has the lowest operating cost and with near closure of Yost Pool this year reduction of operating cost is a valid consideration. Many of the most passionate and vocal community members do support an outdoor only aquatic facility and it may be argued that natural setting of Yost Park is best suited to an outdoor facility. HSAC may build additional indoor lap lanes regardless of what the City does (and maybe moves forward before the City) reducing the demand for indoor swimming. However, Option 1 does somewhat ignore the survey results and the desire for an indoor facility. Certainly the timing to bring forward any proposal is not favorable with the City’s current fiscal issues. However, this current situation does not diminish the need – especially for a facility similar to Option 3 that addresses well the desire for indoor, outdoor, recreation and lap swimming expressed by the Edmonds community. Along with excellent schools and other amenities, an aquatic center that appeals to a broad spectrum of users can assist in making a community a desirable place to stay or an attractive place for relocation. Recreation amenities have been shown to create a positive impact on the quality of life in a community and the aquatic concepts explored in this study may have an economic impact of $200,000 to $1,800,000 annually in the City of Edmonds. Packet Page 343 of 343