Loading...
2011.11.01 CC Agenda Packet                 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds NOVEMBER 1, 2011                 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE   1. (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda   2. (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items   A.Roll Call   B. AM-4311 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 25, 2011.   C. AM-4308 Approval of claim checks #128543 through #128677 dated October 27, 2011 for $511,917.46.   D. AM-4319 Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October, 2011.   E. AM-4312 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Equitable Adjustment from Precision Earthworks, Inc. for $951.924.48.   F. AM-4307 Proclamation recognizing Arbor Day.   3.Audience Comments  (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.   4. (15 Minutes) AM-4306 Cities of Snohomish County Legislative Agenda - 2011/2012   5. (15 Minutes) AM-4316 Annual Report from the Public Defender.   Packet Page 1 of 124 6. (15 Minutes) AM-4313 Public hearing on revenue sources and 2012 property tax levy rate.   7. (20 Minutes) AM-4314 Public hearing on the 2012 proposed budget.   8. (30 Minutes) AM-4317 Public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning a potential amendment to the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan map that would adjust the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center to remove existing single family-designated areas from the Activity Center. The Board recommended amendments to the policy language rather than changing the boundaries.   9. (15 Minutes) AM-4318 Resolution declaring an emergency and waiving public bidding requirements; approve contract with Strider Construction for utility connection at Main Street and Railroad Avenue.   10. (60 Minutes) Convene in executive session to receive and evaluate a complaint or charges brought against a public officer per RCW 42.30.110(1)(f), and regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).   11. (15 Minutes) Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of executive session discussion.   12. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments   13. (15 Minutes) Council Comments   ADJOURN   Packet Page 2 of 124 AM-4311   Item #: 2. B. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Sandy Chase Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 25, 2011. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is a copy of the draft minutes. Attachments 10-25-11 Draft City Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 11:24 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 02:09 PM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 10/27/2011 10:46 AM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 3 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 25, 2011 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Cooper, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Steve Bernheim, Councilmember D. J. Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Lora Petso, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Alex Springer, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Douglas Fair, Municipal Court Judge Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager Rob Chave, Planning Manager Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Deb Sharp, Accountant Joan Ferebee, Court Administrator Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO RECEIVE AND EVALUATE A COMPLAINT OR CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST A PUBLIC OFFICER PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(f), AND REGARDING POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session to receive an evaluate a complaint or charges brought against a public officer per RCW 42.30.110(1)(f) and regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 60 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. He also announced that the City council may take action as a result of meeting in executive session. This action will occur when the City Council reconvenes in open session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 7:04 p.m. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION Mayor Cooper reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:06 p.m. and led the flag salute. Packet Page 4 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 2 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 2011. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #128389 THROUGH #128542 DATED OCTOBER 20, 2011 FOR $702,296.99. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #50883 THROUGH #50906 FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2011 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2011 FOR $623,088.48. D. PROCLAMATION IN RECOGNITION OF PANCREATIC CANCER AWARENESS MONTH IN EDMONDS. E. ADOPTION BY RESOLUTION NO. 1258 OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ESCA HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN. 4. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSION COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO RELEASE PAGE 2 OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION NOTES FROM OCTOBER 18, 2005. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Cooper reminded the public that RCW 42.17.130 regarding the opportunity for public comment, states public comment shall not include comments which promote or oppose candidates for public office or ballot measures except during the course of a public hearing. Two members of the public who spoke last week did not specifically oppose or speak in favor of a candidate, they stated feelings about Councilmembers and their performance. In doing so they were exercising their right to free speech and their opinions about the performance of the City Council. He requested speakers consider some decorum in the manner in which they address Councilmembers and refrain from impugning their motives, honesty or behavior. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Consent Agenda Item E (Adoption by Resolution of the Previously Approved ESCA Hazard Mitigation Plan and Authorization for the Mayor to Sign), recommending the Plan be revised to address the inability to reach the waterfront in the event of a railroad explosion/fire. Next, he referred to campaign literature he received in the mail paid for by the National Association of Realtors Fund in Chicago, expressing concern with a $16,000 campaign contribution by an outside source. He objected to Edmonds’ small town politics being purchased by outside sources. He was disappointed an average resident cannot run for office because “the big guys, the money that wants to control Edmonds” is behind some people running for office. He suggested anyone receiving campaign literature determine who produced the materials and where they originated. Packet Page 5 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 3 Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, suggested voting for a candidate based on who they received money from was not a sound basis for a decision. He suggested people consider the qualifications of candidates and make their decision based on their merit, not the source of money. A candidate’s capabilities, not the source of money will make the difference when he/she is in office. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO REMOVE ITEM D FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA AS ITEM 5A. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5A. PROCLAMATION IN RECOGNITION OF PANCREATIC CANCER AWARENESS MONTH IN EDMONDS Mayor Cooper read a Proclamation declaring November 2011 as Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month in Edmonds. 6. COMPENSATION CONSULTANT PRESENTATION Parks & Recreation/Interim Human Resources Director Carrie Hite explained the Council budgeted funds to hire a compensation consultant in December 2010. There have been several conversations since then and in June 2011 the Council voted to direct staff to advertise an RFQ for compensation and classification study. The RFQ was advertised from August 10 to September 2; 14 firms responded. An interview committee that included Council President Peterson and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas interviewed three consultant firms. Last week the Council approved staff’s recommendation to award a contract to Public Sector Personnel Consultants to perform a classification and compensation study for non- represented positions and a complete job description update for all City positions. Matt Weatherly, President, Public Sector Personnel Consultants, provided an overview of PSPC: • 30+ years in business, dedicated to assisting public sector employers with classification and compensation planning • 1,000+ public employers served throughout the US including more than 300 municipal employers. Recent studies include City of Bothell, Sounds Transit, Grant County PUD, Lewis County, and Bremerton Housing • Devoted full-time staff for the project including the firm’s President and Vice Presidents He recognized it had been approximately 14 years since the City had done a comprehensive classification and compensation study. He suggested such a study to review and update job descriptions be considered due diligence in the budget process. Mr. Weatherly reviewed the project scope and deliverables: • 90-120 day process • City-wide classification and job description updating study of the City’s 207 employees and 120 unique job titles as authorized by Council • Project to include direct employee participation and input • Non-represented Compensation Survey of the approximately 40 positions and 40 job titles comparing City’s total compensation plans by benchmark job, as well as benefits offerings, to the appropriate marketplace(s) • Updating of compensation policies for non-represented job titles and development of updated pay structure to ensure a fair, appropriate and competitive pay system Mr. Weatherly described principal tasks in the compensation survey: • Partnership with City’s Project Committee and HR staff • Identification of competitive employers for comparisons (Council input and/or approval needed) Packet Page 6 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 4 • Data collection from compensation plans of competitor employers • Follow-up to ensure proper matching to selected benchmarks • Comparison of total compensation packages to external practices • Computation of current plan(s) variance from prevailing rates • Identification of opportunities for comparable and/or competitive compensation offerings Data sources for the survey include: • In order to hire and retain high quality staff, should include employers the City competes with to attract and retain its workforce; may include public and private sector • Comparators may vary by “job group” such as: 1) Professional and technical jobs (may include private data) 2) Jobs unique to public sector but regardless of size 3) Management jobs where size and budget are considered • We will collect total compensation data directly from comparators • We will follow up to ensure accurate matching of non-represented positions to the comparator jobs in the market Mr. Weatherly described data interpretation: • Identification of non-represented jobs ahead, behind, at market • Corrections, if needed to pay grade assignments for some jobs, OR • Development and approval of alternative salary range table designs • Recommend pay ranges based on internal equity and external competitiveness • Development of updated banding for non-represented positions • Fiscal impact estimates of recommended compensation plan • Review of draft compensation plan with HR, Project Committee • “Pay philosophy” and updated policies for the City’s consideration (Council input and/or approval needed) • Compensation administration provisions and final report preparation Mr. Weatherly explained questionnaires have been distributed to allow employees to articulate their duties and responsibilities. He described the Committee and Council’s involvement: • Ensuring PSPC’s adherence to project objectives • Enumerating any compensation-related policy issues • Identifying objective market comparators, data sources • Identifying total compensation elements to survey • Providing critical policy determinations and directions: o Salary competitiveness policy or philosophy o Implementation strategies and methods o Continued communication with Council, City leadership, project team and stakeholders Mr. Weatherly summarized they will work closely with staff to develop the best possible approach with the Council’s input that will provide a sustainable, defensible equitable, competitive, and fair compensation plan, not just for the immediate future but the framework for a model the City can follow in the future and reference in future updating and maintenance of the compensation plan. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her concern with banding and how bands are selected. She asked whether the study will consider each band to determine whether the correct positions are in each band. Mr. Weatherly answered yes, they will utilize two major factors, 1) the questionnaires which lead the employee on a path to internal equity, and 2) interpretation of market data. There may be instances where internally a band adjustment should be made and instances where the market data supports or refutes that Packet Page 7 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 5 change. A balance is needed between internal equity and external competitiveness via application of market data and interpretation of the job description questionnaire. Councilmember Buckshnis explained there is an employee who performs two director jobs, economic development and community services. She asked whether a recommendation would be made with regard to whether to establish a larger department, combine departments, etc. Mr. Weatherly answered their recommendations will not be in regard to organizational design. The City has a lean staffing model which leads to employees performing two or more roles. They can survey those different roles and identify the uniqueness of those roles. Unless directed otherwise, they will not make recommendations on organizational design or staffing analysis from a service-delivery standpoint with regard to combining or splitting departments. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the consultant intended to use the recent WCIA survey. Mr. Weatherly commented they will be sensitive to data in the survey with regard to current job descriptions that are found to be lacking, inadequate, or out of compliance. He was not familiar with the data in the WCIA survey, whether they had done a compensation survey work that they could use. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how the Council would provide input to the consultant. Mr. Weatherly answered his contact information can be made available and he invited Councilmembers to contact him. This initial discussion with Council is occurring early in the process to ensure the Council was familiar with decision points, Council input components, market model, survey comparators, data sources, etc. He intended to bring the market model to the Council in the next 35-40 days for reaction, input and direction. Ms. Hite offered to be a conduit for the Council to provide information to Mr. Weatherly or provide the Council Mr. Weatherly’s contact information. 7. RESOLUTION REGARDING WOODWAY POLICE SERVICES CONTRACT Police Chief Al Compaan explained this has been discussed with the Finance Committee at their July 12 meeting and Councilmember Petso who chairs that committee. The existing contract with the Town of Woodway for police services extends through the end of 2012. The Finance Committee was interested in providing direction to the Council and for the Council to provide policy direction for negotiation of a contract to succeed the present agreement on a full cost recovery basis. The proposed resolution was drafted by Councilmember Petso and City Attorney Jeff Taraday. Council President Peterson explained Councilmember Petso worked on the resolution and is absent tonight due to illness. If the Council felt Councilmember Petso’s input was important, action could be delayed. The existing police service contract with Woodway does not expire until the end of 2012. Councilmember Buckshnis, also a member of the Finance Committee, explained Woodway’s contract with Fire District 1 (FD1) is approximately $55,000/month. Edmonds currently collects $8,000- $10,000/year from Woodway for police services. She relayed Councilmember Petso’s preference to institute a monthly flat rate charge for police protection that would cover the cost of providing the service rather than the current per call basis. Council President Peterson clarified the proposed resolution does not contain any negotiation specifics. The resolution notifies Woodway that Edmonds is interested in a different style of contracting than the existing contract. Specific negotiations would occur in the future. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if there was a desire to table the resolution due to Councilmember Petso’s absence. She was prepared to proceed without Councilmember Petso present. Council President Peterson found the resolution very straight forward and did not feel action needed to be delayed. Packet Page 8 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 6 Mayor Cooper advised this issue was discussed at the Finance Committee as well as at a meeting with Chief Compaan, staff, Councilmember Petso and him to discuss next steps. The purpose of the resolution is to provide Chief Compaan and him direction for future contract negotiations. COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1259, TO NOTIFY THE TOWN OF WOODWAY THAT THE CITY OF EDMONDS INTENDS TO BEGIN NEGOTIATING A NEW CONTRACT WITH THE TOWN OF WOODWAY TO PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES ON A FULL SERVICE BASIS. City Attorney Jeff Taraday pointed out the existing agreement with Woodway can be terminated without cause by either party upon 90 days written notice. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND SECTION 1 TO READ: … THE CITY OF EDMONDS WILL NO LONGER PROVIDE POLICE SERVICES ON THE CURRENT A FEE PER CALL BASIS.” AND ADD SECTION 3 THAT READS: “AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE AN INCREASE FEE PER CALL CONTRACT THAT COVERS THE TRUE COST OF POLICE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS.” Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Council President Peterson had researched a per trip versus a flat rate. Council President Peterson answered he has not. He anticipated the full service contract is better for Edmonds but entering into a new negotiation, he did not want to be limited to an all or nothing approach. There are two opportunities with Woodway, a full service contract, or if Woodway has no interest in that, a per call service contract at an increased rate. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas summarized the amendment adds the fee per call concept to the resolves of the resolution. She observed the amendment referenced establishing a fee that covers the true cost of police services. Council President Peterson acknowledged the true cost of police services will be one of the key negotiating points of this contract. Councilmember Wilson provided comments that Councilmember Petso may have made were she present. Councilmember Petso would likely argue that the current fee of $137.50 per call does not cover the cost. Councilmember Wilson remarked he would love to be able to buy health insurance and only pay when he went to the doctor or homeowners insurance that he only paid for when his home was burglarized. That is the basis of the City’s current contract with Woodway. Councilmember Petso would likely argue that Edmonds would prefer a contract that apportions the relative cost for Woodway based on their population or property value or some other measure as a percentage of the overall cost for police because Edmonds taxpayers pay 100% of their share regardless of whether they utilize police services. Conversely, Woodway pays only when the police respond but have coverage 100% of the time. Woodway should pay as much of their share as Edmonds citizens do. He preferred to proceed with negotiations with Woodway for payment of police services on a full service basis. Councilmember Bernheim agreed a full service contract was needed with Woodway in order to cover the cost of providing the service. Woodway is the beneficiary of the current contract; Edmonds does not need the income Woodway provides to finance the Police Department. Edmonds has its own Police Department to protect its residents and does not need a contract to provide police protection to Woodway. The only fiscally prudent reason to renew the contract would be if Woodway came close to covering the cost of service. He did not support the amendment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed if Woodway was not interested in contracting for police services on a full service basis, they could contract with Shoreline or form their own Police Department. She agreed with Councilmember Bernheim that it be more beneficial to Edmonds to charge the true cost versus on a per call basis which may not cover the cost of police service. Packet Page 9 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 7 THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION FAILED (1-5), WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING YES. Council President Peterson asked whether Edmonds police officers would respond to a 911 call in Woodway if Woodway terminated their contract with Edmonds. Chief Compaan answered Edmonds officers would respond to a life safety issue just as Edmonds responds to Shoreline, Lynnwood and vice versa in accordance with mutual aid. He commented when one of Woodway’s part-time officers is on duty, they assist in Edmonds. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. WORK SESSION ON THE 2012 BUDGET Council President Peterson advised a public hearing on the budget was scheduled on November 1. He requested Councilmembers begin bringing budget amendments for Council consideration next week. He asked whether an interactive spreadsheet such as was used in last year’s budget would be provided. Mayor Cooper answered yes. Councilmember Plunkett recalled in the past Councilmembers have presented amendments for Council discussion but no action was taken on amendments until a motion was made on the budget in late November/early December. He asked whether that process would be followed this year or would action be taken on amendments as they were proposed. He would be unable to vote on amendments until all amendments had been proposed and discussed. Council President Peterson clarified his intent was for Councilmembers to propose amendments to allow for a full discussion. Councilmember Plunkett suggested scheduling time on the agenda to discuss the amendments, recognizing that some amendments will be supported and others will be dropped during that process. Council President Peterson anticipated that specific discussion would be scheduled on either November 15 or 22. Non-Department Financial Consultant Jim Tarte explained Non-Department totals $11.3 million. He highlighted Non- Departmental expenditures over $100,000 and invited Council input: • $6.3 million – Fire District 1 Contract • $1.4 million – Principal & Interest Payments • $912,000 – SnoCom / New World • $600,000 – LEOFF Medical Expense Fund • $444,000 – Insurance – Liability & Property • $250,000 – Edmonds Center for Arts (ECA) • $197,000 – Hydrant Costs • $165,000 – Miscellaneous Contingency • $160,000 – ESCA/ SERS • $148,000 – Public Defender • $100,000 – Accrued vacation / sick payouts Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the $165,000 Miscellaneous Contingency, recognizing that was used in the private sector but was not common in municipalities. She was concerned that provided a rubber stamp to the Mayor to spend $165,000 and if safeguards were not in place, it would be an at-will contingency. Mr. Tarte explained Mayor Cooper and he reviewed each department’s budget with the department in detail. If there was no justification for increasing a line item, it was reduced to the 2011 estimate amount. During that process there were a number of items identified that the Council, Mayor or Director do not have any control over whether the amount will meet the 2012 budget. For example, the $250,000 ECA loan guarantee or jail costs. The proposed 2012 budget of $526,000 for jail costs is the Packet Page 10 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 8 lowest in the past 6 years and represents best case scenario. In a number of departments, repairs and maintenance costs are based on historical expenses. However, failure of an HVAC system or a server could cost $20,000-$30,000. Mr. Tarte summarized every department’s budget is a best case scenario. In his experience, it is highly unlikely that a private or public entity will have a best case scenario for all departments. After consolidating all the budgets, he felt it prudent to add a contingency for under-budgeted items. He emphasized the Miscellaneous Contingency was for under-budgeted expenditures that are beyond the City and staff’s ability to control. That is specifically stated in the budget narrative. The Council could take action to require this fund only be used for under-budget items. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out budget amendments are used to address under-budget expenditures. She preferred to do an amendment if additional funds were necessary for the ECA bond debt rather than utilizing funds from the Miscellaneous Contingency. Mr. Tarte explained revenues in the General Fund budget exceed expenditures by $43,000; removing the Miscellaneous Contingency increases that amount to approximately $200,000. A citizen, Councilmember or Mayor may think that is extra money that can be spent when in reality that $200,000 cannot be spent because there is no contingency for things that may happen over the course of the year citywide. If a contingency is not budgeted, it is likely expenditures will exceed revenues. He concluded budgeting for a Miscellaneous Contingency is prudent as long as there are proper controls. Councilmember Wilson asked what would be an adequate percentage for a $60-70 million budget for contingency expenditures in the public or private sector. Mr. Tarte answered ½%. The Miscellaneous Contingency is in the General Fund which has expenditures of approximately $33 million; $33 million multiplied by ½% is approximately $165,000. Councilmember Wilson commented ½%seems pretty low for a contingency when each department does not have a contingency. Mayor Cooper asked Mr. Tarte to explain the FD1 contract amount and what could happen in the LEOFF Medical Expense Fund, currently budgeted at $600,000. Mr. Tarte explained the LEOFF Medical Expense Fund was $375,000 last year; the $225,000 increase is the largest increase in the General Fund from 2011 to 2012. The increase is due to anticipated medical expenditures of the City’s LEOFF1 retirees. That fund currently has a balance of approximately $300,000, an approximately 6 month reserve; the estimated medical expenditures in 2012 of $600,000 do not expend the fund balance. Mayor Cooper pointed out that one more LEOFF1 retiree moving into an assisted living facility has the potential to increase expenditures by $200,000/year. Mr. Tarte agreed. With regard to the FD1 contract, Mr. Tarte explained the contract is currently $6.2 million; FD1 has not communicated any increase to the City although the contract states that will occur by September 1. He has heard the increase may be as high as 3.7%. FD1 is in negotiations with their unions. The projected $6.3 million was calculated by adding 2.5%; once negotiations with the FD1 firefighter union are completed, that amount may change. If a 3.7% increase is approved, the budget will need to be increased by approximately $75,000; if it is less than 2.5%, the $6.3 million amount can be reduced. Council President Peterson agreed safeguards on the use of the Miscellaneous Contingency were appropriate. He envisioned the Miscellaneous Contingency would make it easier to track cost overruns from under-budgeted items via a quarterly review by the Finance Committee. Safeguards could include expenditures over a certain amount must be approved by the Council. Mayor Cooper pointed out any expenditure over $100,000 would need to be approved by the Council. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with practices that were inconsistent with other cities’ practices. She preferred to follow industry standards and the practices used by other cities. She offered to Packet Page 11 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 9 research whether other cities used a Miscellaneous Contingency. She relayed Mr. Hunstock’s indication that Tukwila does not budget a Miscellaneous Contingency. Councilmember Plunkett preferred to do a budget amendment to address under-budget expenditures. Councilmember Bernheim asked whether the FD1 contract stated the contract shall be adjusted each year no later than September 1. Mr. Tarte agreed it did. Councilmember Bernheim asked what happened now that FD1 had not informed the City of any increase. Mayor Cooper explained the contract amount increase is tied to the COLA received by firefighters. The firefighters’ multi-year collective bargaining agreement has a 3.7% COLA for 2012, 100% of the CPI. FD1 is currently in negotiations with the firefighters’ union regarding a concession. If the firefighters’ union does a concession and does not accept the entire 3.7%, the contract would increase by a lesser amount. Councilmember Bernheim referred to the contract clause that states the payment shall be adjusted each year no later than September 1, presumably so the City can budget, and asked whether labor costs were independent of that clause. Mayor Cooper responded FD1 had a verbal conversation with Mr. Tarte during preparation of the budget that the firefighters’ contract includes a 3.7% increase. Until negotiations are completed, that exact percentage increase is unknown. Councilmember Bernheim asked whether FD1 was required to inform the City by September 1. Mr. Tarte agreed the contract states that will occur by September 1. He offered to research the consequence if the increase was not submitted by that date. Mayor Cooper advised the increase was included in the $6.3 million budgeted for FD1, depending on negotiations, that amount could be lower. Public Works Public Works Director Phil Williams explained Public Works has multiple revenue sources with restrictions on how they are spent. He reviewed the Public Works 2012 expenditure budgets: Operating Administration( 0.83%) $ 294,110 Facilities 1,351,548 Engineering 1,318,706 Streets 1,568,948 Combined Utility 15,558,643 - Rate Capital 1,772,053 - Debt Service 1,653,672 - Utility Taxes 1,548,996 - Water Purchase 1,410,000 Fleet 1,311,334 Capital Street Capital 2,075,525 Facilities Capital 245,000 Utility Capital 11,591,444 - Water 3,337,589 - Storm 2,137,086 - Sewer 4,990,393 - Treatment 1,126,376 Total $35,312,358 Mr. Williams emphasized the above Streets budget does not include any funds for paving. He reviewed O&M expenses in the Combined Utility Fund ($15,558,643): Water $5.37 million Sewer $4.47 million Packet Page 12 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 10 Storm $2.26 million Treatment $3.45 million Mr. Williams explained in 2010 the Council reviewed, modified and approved a new Water System Comprehensive Plan and a Utility Rate Study and Cost of Service Analysis. That, in addition to approval of new Stormwater Comprehensive Plan and the imbedded capital programs, the Council adopted a three- part rate package that resulted in a 4.4-4.5% water and stormwater rate increase on August 1, 2010 and January 1, 2011. The final rate increase, 7.5% water and 8% stormwater will be implemented on January 1, 2012. The impact of those increases is a total combined utility rate for an average single family residential using 800 cubic feet/month of $71.92 with utility tax ($32.55 water, $27.85 sewer, and $11.52 stormwater). The utility bills on a bimonthly basis. Mr. Williams reviewed a rate comparison (without utility tax): Edmonds Lynnwood Mountlake Terrace Shoreline Water $27.42 $19.21 $28.91 $36.63 Sewer $25.32 $35.38 $37.52 $33.00 Storm $10.47 $ 7.52 $ 9.08 $10.84 Total $63.21 $63.22 $75.51 $80.47 Mr. Williams explained the year-to-year difference in Public Works budgets is due capital projects. He highlighted projects in Fund 112 Transportation, Fund 116 Facilities, Fund 412-100 Water, Fund 412-300 Sewer, Fund 412-200 Storm, and Fund 412 Wastewater Treatment Plant. Mr. Williams commented on the need to pursue revenue bonds for capital programs in water ($6.73 million), sewer ($1.1 million) and stormwater ($3.2 million) along with current refunding of utility revenue bond debt. He pointed out differences between the 2012 and the 2011 budget due to: • Loss of a custodian (not replacing a custodian who retired) $ 61,100 (decrease) • No General Fund Contribution to the 511 B $300,000 (decrease) • Estimated increase in fuel costs $ 26,000 (increase) Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the lower than anticipated revenue from the TBD, approximately $600,000 in 2012. Mr. Williams explained when the TBD was approved in 2009, it was anticipated the vehicle license fee would generate $750,000/year. In 2010, the first full year the fee was collected, the City collected $589,000. He anticipated the revenue the City was receiving now was what would be received in the future. He pointed out the Street budget had only two major revenue sources, 1) the $20 fixed TBD fee, and 2) the fixed per gallon gas tax. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether passage of the Street Levy would impact Fund 111. Mr. Williams anticipated the funds would come to Fund 112, Street Construction. Parks & Recreation and Cultural Services Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite reviewed expenses and highlighted changes: 2011 Budget 2011 Estimate 2012 Budget 2011 Budget to 2012 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Estimate Salaries & Ben. $2,512,735 $2,364,984 $2,457,845 ($54,890) $92,861 Supplies $114,590 $106,494 $144,026 $29,436 $37,532 Prof. Services $357,534 $344,954 $339,666 ($17,868) ($5,288) Utilities $133,416 $155,000 $150,000 $16,584 ($5,000) Packet Page 13 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 11 Inter Gov/Fund $130,094 $136,545 $137,823 $7,729 $1,278 Miscellaneous $38,570 $74,002 $76,370 $37,800 $2,368 Other $118,286 $115,385 $130,318 $12,032 $14,933 Total $3,405,225 $3,297,364 $3,436,048 $30,823 $138,684 Ms. Hite explained the increases in supplies, miscellaneous and other are due primarily to the grant the City received from the Swedish Hospital Foundation (Verdant Grant). The increase in revenue equals the additional expenditures. The reduction in the professional services budget is the result of changing the split percentage with contract instructors this year and in 2012. Ms. Hite reviewed revenues: 2011 Budget 2011 Estimate 2012 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Estimate Recreation $807,500 $872,629 $860,000 $52,500 ($12,629) Non Resident $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Verdant Grant $69,300 $69,300 $69,300 Fac. Rent $319,683 $314,504 $332,885 $13,202 $18,381 Pool $138,350 $112,695 $139,519 $1,169 $26,824 Total $1,265,533 $1,299,828 $1,461,704 $196,171 $161,876 Increase 13% 11% Ms. Hite advised pool revenues were down this year. She is preparing an analysis of pool revenues that will be available next week. (Councilmember Wilson left the meeting at 8:50 p.m.) Ms. Hite reviewed the total Parks budget: 2011 Budget 2011 Estimate 2012 Budget 2011 Budget to 2012 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Estimate Revenue $1,265,533 $1,299,828 $1,461,704 $196,171 $161,876 Expenses $3,405,225 $3,297,364 $3,436,048 $30,823 $138,684 ($2,139,692) ($1,997,536) ($1,974,344) $165,348 $23,192 Increase/ Decrease -5% -1% Ms. Hite reviewed decision packages in the proposed budget: • Tree Maintenance costs (ongoing): $25,000 • Walker riding mower (one time): $17,500 • Cemetery seasonal staff (ongoing) $ 5,000 • Class Software for Pool (one time): $ 8,675 • Class Software Maintenance (ongoing): $ 1,642 • Landpride pull behind mower (one time): $17,144 Ms. Hite explained funds have never been budgeted for tree trimming and as a result funds are taken from other line items in either Parks or Public Works. Trees continually need trimming and she encouraged the Council to budget for that need. She recommended the funding for the Walker riding mower come from the Cemetery Fund as the mower is used specifically for the cemetery. Packet Page 14 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 12 Ms. Hite identified the following issues: A. Cemetery Maintenance Improvement Fund • Expenses continue to grow, revenues are flat, therefore fund balance is decreasing. • Current fund balance will carry us through 2012 and part of 2013. • Will need to look at structural issues of this fund. B. Park Trust Fund: Yost Pool • Trust fund for Yost “save the pool” campaign depleted in 2011. • Long term operational goal is to increase revenue, decrease expenses and minimize subsidy. • This year, revenue was decreased due to weather and the new Lynnwood pool. C. Beautification Program for 2012: • $40,000 in General Fund expenditures • $36,000 in REET 125 expenditures • REET 125 only for capital, with some allowance now for M & O. • Will need to look at this in the future, when legislation expires. Community Services & Economic Development Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton reviewed the Community Services budget: • 2012 Budget: $323,006 • Reduction from 2011 Budget: 4% • Increase from 2011 Estimated Year End: 5% Community Services 2011 Budget 2011 Estimate 2012 Budget 2011 Budget to 2012 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Est. Salaries & Benefits 276,324 266,505 273,476 (2,848) 6,971 Professional Services 50,514 35,670 42,000 (8,514) 6,330 Other Costs 8,390 6,540 7,530 (860) 990 Dep’t Budget 335,228 308,715 323,006 (12,222) 14,291 Percentage Increase/Decrease -4% -5% Mr. Clifton explained the decrease in the professional services line item was there were only expenditures the government relations contract (Mike Doubleday) and no expenditures for environmental litigation. Mr. Clifton reviewed the Economic Development budget pointing out all salaries and benefits are in the Community Services budget: • 2012 Budget: $114,200 • Increase from 2011 Budget: 46% • Increase from 2011 Estimated Year End: 72% Economic Development 2011 Budget 2011 Estimate 2012 Budget 2011 Budget to 2012 Budget 2012 Budget to 2011 Est. Professional Services 35,800 37,518 79,000 43,200 41,482 Advertising, 25,000 24,000 30,000 5,000 6,000 Other Costs 17,300 4,950 5,200 -12,100 250 Dep’t Budget 78,100 66,468 114,200 36,100 47,732 Percentage Increase/Decrease 46% (related to strategic plan ) 72% (related to strategic plan) Packet Page 15 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 13 Mr. Clifton advised when the budget was prepared, the expected expenditure for Beckwith Consulting Group in 2011 was $40,000 with the balance spent in 2012. Due to the schedule adjustment, the consultant expects to expend $28,000 this year and the balance in 2012. The 2012 budget for professional services will increase by that amount. He emphasized the total $100,000 appropriated for the strategic plan has not changed. Development Services Planning Manager Rob Chave explained operations of the Development Services Department consist of programs designed to meet the requirements of federal, state, and locally mandated laws and codes and other discretionary services. The department consists of two divisions, planning and building as well as an administrative division with code enforcement and reception. The Development Director position is not budgeted in 2012. Mr. Chave reviewed expenditures: 2011 Estimate 2012 Proposed Percentage Administration $257,515 $279,404 8.50% Building Services $651,699 $641,191 -1.60% Planning Services $759,127 $734,267 -3.30% Total Department $1,668,341 $1,654,862 -0.80% Mr. Chave reviewed revenues: 2011 Estimate 2012 Proposed Percentage Building Permits $400,000 $420,000 5.00% Plan Review $225,000 $235,000 4.40% Land Use $76,500 $80,500 5.20% Total $701,500 $735,500 4.80% Mr. Chave reviewed a chart comparing the number of Development Services employees to building permits 1985 – 2011 estimate. The 2012 budget includes 2 employees in admin, 6 in building and 6 in planning for a total of 14, the same number the department had 25 years ago. Over that same period of time, the City has experienced a 34% increase in population. Because of the City’s slow growth, the number of permits represents small scale activity with occasional increases in activity from significant projects such as Pt. Edwards. He pointed out a modest increase in employment in peak years but the City never built up its employment during the peak. The City has decreased its employment somewhat in the downturn but not as much as other jurisdictions, one of the benefits of holding the line during peak years. Mr. Chave displayed a graph comparing building permits issued through September: • 2007 954 • 2008 826 • 2009 679 • 2010 681 • 2011 808 Mr. Chave explained summarized people are still doing projects, just smaller projects and activity levels are beginning to increase. He displayed a graph comparing commercial building permits to project valuation through September): New Construction Alter/Addition • 2006 $6,542,069 $4,686,935 • 2007 $ 249,610 $6,518,858 Packet Page 16 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 14 • 2008 $1,565,228 $4,898,576 • 2009 $1,796,450 $1,691,846 • 2010 $0 $5,117,138 • 2011 $5,214,317 $3,647,105 Mr. Chave highlighted budget implications: • Maintenance budget • No major new program initiatives • Commitment to reviewing department organization to focus on core priorities and sustainable service delivery Court Municipal Court Judge Doug Fair explained the court was anticipating steady salary expenditures as no staff had been added or lost. Court costs are driven by the number of filings; filings have remained fairly steady over the past 3-4 years. He anticipated an increase in interpreter costs as a more diverse population comes into the court. The court is required to provide interpreter services in court and probationary services. Council Mr. Tarte displayed the City Council budget (page 13 of 2012 budget) and highlighted the following: • A $34,000 decrease in benefits due to an ordinance passed to eliminate health benefits for dependents • A decrease in professional services due to lower City Attorney costs (a portion is allocated to City Council budget) • Council Contingency Miscellaneous similar to the Miscellaneous Contingency in Non- Department to fund unforeseen events. Historically this has been used for legal situations. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the difference between the Council Contingency Miscellaneous and the Miscellaneous Contingency in Non-Department was the Council controlled expenditures in the Council Contingency Miscellaneous, the Miscellaneous Contingency in Non-Department did not have any controls. She pointed out the Council Contingency Miscellaneous replaces the Council Contingency in the General Fund. Mr. Tarte agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis complimented Mr. Tarte on how understandable the 2012 budget is. Mr. Tarte concluded the General Fund budget has $43,000 revenues in excess of expenditures (page 4 of 2012 budget). The following funds are using their beginning fund balance to cover 2012 expenditures beyond their revenues: • $300,000 – Vehicle Replace Fund • $256,000 – Street Fund • $ 19,000 - LEOFF Medical Expense Fund • $ 25,000 – Fire Pension Fund • $188,000 – Building Maintenance Fund • $788,000 – Total Mr. Tarte concluded the 2012 budget will get the City through 2012 but it is by no means a sustainable model. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the 2012 expenditure of $188,000 from the Building Maintenance Fund will be addressed if the building maintenance levy passes. Mr. Williams answered Proposition 3 is a total of $500,000. Staff and Council’s proposal was to split that between building and Packet Page 17 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 15 parks maintenance. A list of building maintenance and parks maintenance projects in the CIP were submitted that will be pursued with that additional funding. Mr. Tarte cautioned budget amendments in the 4th quarter of 2012 may be higher than in previous years due to the tight budgeting in 2012. 9. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the Snohomish Health District, reminding that unused, non- narcotic medications can be dropped off at Bartell’s at Westgate and narcotics can be dropped off at the Edmonds Police Department. She thanked the Edmonds Police Department for participating in this effort to keep medications out of the garbage and water. Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Economic Development Commission (EDC) discussed the UW study, outreach to citizens, the City’s new website and whether the term of EDC should be extended. Mayor Cooper reported the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) Planning Committee is moving forward. One of the questions the Finance Committee was considering was whether such a large organization could be funded within the assessed value of the region. The Finance Subcommittee reported a RFA could be sustained within the funding mechanism and available assessed value. The next step is for the Finance Subcommittee, which Councilmember Petso serves on, to present a complete financial plan to the Planning Committee and for the Strategic Level of Service Subcommittee, which Councilmember Wilson serves on, to present a plan to the Planning Committee. After those plans are adopted during the first quarter of 2012, they will be presented to City Councils and Fire Commission Boards for approval and a resolution whether the jurisdiction wants to continue. Mayor Cooper reported the city of Bothell has asked to join the RFA Planning Committee; that will be debated at the November Planning Committee meeting. He anticipated in November/December Councilmember Petso and Councilmember Wilson will report details regarding the subcommittees’ efforts. He encouraged the Council and the public to visit the RFA’s website (RTA-Planning.org) for ongoing information. He reported the City’s new Finance Director Shawn Hunstock has a great deal of experience with RFAs, having participated in the Valley Regional Fire Authority in Auburn while working in Auburn and Tukwila’s investigation of their participation in Kent’s RFA. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Cooper reported he attended Cascade Symphony’s 50th anniversary concert on October 23 and read the proclamation. The theme of the concert was Rick Steves’ tour through Europe and Mr. Steves narrated the music. The October 23 and 24 concert were filmed and the city of Edmonds and the Cascade Symphony will be featured in a PBS program. Dr. Bob Anderson, who started the Cascade Symphony 50 years ago, was in attendance; he was the orchestra conductor when Councilmember Plunkett and he attended Edmonds High School. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis encouraged citizens to thank Mr. Tarte for everything he has done for the City. Councilmember Bernheim expressed concern with the $16,000 in independent expenditures on Edmonds political campaigns. He found it a dangerous precedent and urged citizens to express their dissatisfaction with national pacts spending that much money compared to the amount candidates typically spend. He Packet Page 18 of 124 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2011 Page 16 recalled spending $8,000-$9,000 on his City Council campaign. He objected to an independent expenditure from a political interest group in that amount. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked the Spady family for a wonderful grand opening at Dick’s Drive In. Mayor Cooper and Councilmembers Bernheim, Councilmember Petso and she attended the grand opening. Council President Peterson congratulated Councilmember Plunkett on the birth of his grandchild. Convene in Executive Session At 9:35 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, and Peterson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 9:55 p.m. Mayor Cooper reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 9:58 p.m. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:59 p.m. Packet Page 19 of 124 AM-4308   Item #: 2. C. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:Consent   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Nori Jacobson Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action  Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #128543 through #128677 dated October 27, 2011 for $511,917.46. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of claim checks. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2011 Revenue: Expenditure:511,917.46 Fiscal Impact: Claims $511,917.46 Attachments Claim Checks 10-27-11 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Shawn Hunstock 10/27/2011 01:10 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 02:08 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 03:00 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 04:28 PM Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 10/27/2011 08:17 AM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 20 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128543 10/27/2011 071324 3-D ROOFING SYSTEMS LLC 4169A Wade James - Final Retention Payment Wade James - Final Retention Payment 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 324.29 Total :324.29 128544 10/27/2011 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 1Z0529868 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 155.30 INTERPRETER FEECIZ494051 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 160.80 INTERPRETER FEECR21924 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 161.90 INTERPRETER FEECR28321 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 145.95 INTERPRETER FEECR28375 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 165.20 Total :789.15 128545 10/27/2011 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 1011286 ATHLETIC SHIRTS PICKLEBALL, WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL AND 001.000.640.575.520.310.00 202.79 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.575.520.310.00 19.27 Total :222.06 128546 10/27/2011 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND NOV 2011 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 11/11 EDMONDS AC ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 11/11 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2,032.66 Total :2,032.66 128547 10/27/2011 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101542232 M5Z34 1Page: Packet Page 21 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128547 10/27/2011 (Continued)066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC CARBON MONOXIDE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 453.23 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 43.06 Total :496.29 128548 10/27/2011 073391 ALL CLIMATE HEATING & AIR COND bld2011.0363 Permit Void - outside City limits. Permit Void - outside City limits. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 75.00 Total :75.00 128549 10/27/2011 065568 ALLWATER INC 102011030 COEWASTE DRINKING WATER 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 23.52 Total :23.52 128550 10/27/2011 064399 ALPHAGRAPHICS 182353 E6DA.COPIES OF PRECISION CLAIM E6DA.Copies of Precision Claim 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 1,132.27 Total :1,132.27 128551 10/27/2011 068857 AMEC EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL INC C15926257 Perrinville Creek Fish Salvage (Creek Perrinville Creek Fish Salvage (Creek 411.000.652.542.400.410.00 1,350.00 Total :1,350.00 128552 10/27/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5823763 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 30.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 2.86 PW MATS655-5828329 PW MATS 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.01 PW MATS 2Page: Packet Page 22 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128552 10/27/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 3.83 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.34 STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC655-5828330 Street Storm Uniform Svc 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 5.00 Street Storm Uniform Svc 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.47 FLEET UNIFORM SVC655-5828331 Fleet Uniform Svc 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 10.00 9.5% Sales Tax 3Page: Packet Page 23 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128552 10/27/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 0.95 Total :76.95 128553 10/27/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5823762 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 39.71 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.77 Total :43.48 128554 10/27/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5823769 21580001 UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 70.36 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.68 Total :77.04 128555 10/27/2011 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0232327-IN 01-7500014 DIESEL FUEL 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 4,251.61 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 403.91 Total :4,655.52 128556 10/27/2011 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 1096 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 100.00 INTERPRETER FEE1098 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 100.00 Total :200.00 128557 10/27/2011 073853 BECKWITH CONSULTING GROUP 01-111001 STRATEGIC PLAN TASK 1 & 2 Strategic Plan consulting billing for 001.000.110.550.100.490.00 5,040.00 4Page: Packet Page 24 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :5,040.0012855710/27/2011 073853 073853 BECKWITH CONSULTING GROUP 128558 10/27/2011 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 892392 INV#892392 - EDMONDS PD - RAMSEUR CLOTH NAMETAGS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.90 CHEVRONS - CORPORAL 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 38.94 PATROL JACKET W/LINER 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 395.00 INV#899868 - EDMONDS PD - SMITH, RT899868 S/S TROP/WOOL SHIRTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 196.98 CLOTH NAME TAGS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 14.85 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 20.12 INV#899880 - EDMONDS PD - PLOEGER899880 S/S TROP/WOOL SHIRT 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 65.66 CLOTH NAME TAG 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.95 CHEVRONS - SGT 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 2.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 6.95 Total :760.85 128559 10/27/2011 073560 BRAYMAN, KIMBERLIE BRAYMAN14389 MIXED MEDIA TECHNIQUES MIXED MEDIA TECHNIQUES #14389 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 148.20 Total :148.20 128560 10/27/2011 071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL BRUNETTE14613 PRENATAL YOGA PRENATAL YOGA #14613 5Page: Packet Page 25 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128560 10/27/2011 (Continued)071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 168.00 Total :168.00 128561 10/27/2011 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL 295631 Roadway - Rock Roadway - Rock 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 1,682.57 Roadway - Rock 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 841.28 Roadway - Rock 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 841.28 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 159.85 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 79.92 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 79.92 Total :3,684.82 128562 10/27/2011 061966 CAMP FIRE BOYS & GIRLS CAMPFIRE14503 BABY SITTING BASICS BABYSITTING BASICS #14503 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 240.00 Total :240.00 128563 10/27/2011 068484 CEMEX LLC 9422361389 Roadway - Asphalt Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 450.48 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 42.80 Roadway - Asphalt9422381068 Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 132.66 9.2% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 12.20 Roadway - Asphalt9422389258 Roadway - Asphalt 6Page: Packet Page 26 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128563 10/27/2011 (Continued)068484 CEMEX LLC 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 520.48 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 49.44 Roadway - Asphalt9422396193 Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 140.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 13.30 Roadway - Asphalt9422403341 Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 520.48 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 49.45 Total :1,931.29 128564 10/27/2011 073616 CFO SELECTIONS LLC 7740 Jim Tarte - Interim Finance Director Jim Tarte - Interim Finance Director 001.000.310.514.100.410.00 5,250.00 Total :5,250.00 128565 10/27/2011 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT14633 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #14633 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 78.40 Total :78.40 128566 10/27/2011 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 8943 INV#8943 CUST#45 - EDMONDS PD NEXTEL PHONE FOR NARCS 09/11 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 57.21 INV#8944 CUST#1430 - EDMONDS PD8944 VERIZON PHONES NARCS 09/11 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 50.94 INV#8945 CUST#1655 - EDMONDS PD8945 VERIZON INTERNET NARCS 09/11 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 43.01 INV#8953 CUST#47 - EDMONDS PD8953 7Page: Packet Page 27 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128566 10/27/2011 (Continued)019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD INMATE R&B - SEPT 2011 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 1,355.83 Total :1,506.99 128567 10/27/2011 073844 CLIMATE SOLUTIONS 1146 New Energy Cities Program Workshop New Energy Cities Program Workshop 001.000.620.558.800.410.00 15,000.00 Total :15,000.00 128568 10/27/2011 073851 C-N-I LOCATES LTD 9743 MILLTOWN COURTYARD TECHNICIAN FOR MILLTOWN COURTYARD 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 150.00 Total :150.00 128569 10/27/2011 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2364606 Fac Maint - Disinfectent Cleaner, TT, Fac Maint - Disinfectent Cleaner, TT, 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 512.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 48.72 Total :561.52 128570 10/27/2011 073667 COBURN, LI COBURN1023 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 105.00 Total :105.00 128571 10/27/2011 073387 COLELLA, CAROL COLELLA100711 SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENDANT SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENDANT @ MEADOWDALE 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 200.00 Total :200.00 128572 10/27/2011 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY1020 PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE~ 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 100.00 Total :100.00 8Page: Packet Page 28 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128573 10/27/2011 072848 COPIERS NW INV594353 COPIER MAINT /RENTAL COPIER MAINT /RENTAL 001.000.230.512.501.450.00 25.97 Total :25.97 128574 10/27/2011 069848 CRAM, KATHERINE CRAM14583 IRISH DANCE CLASSES IRISH DANCE #14583 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 124.80 IRISH DANCE #14584 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 41.60 Total :166.40 128575 10/27/2011 005965 CUES INC 353164 Storm - Video Cable Kit Storm - Video Cable Kit 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 431.57 Freight 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 9.86 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 41.94 Total :483.37 128576 10/27/2011 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3255396 E1CA.RFQ ADVERTISING E1CA.RFQ Advertising 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 392.40 Total :392.40 128577 10/27/2011 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING 10/5/11 - 10/26/11 STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PISTOL State Share of Concealed Pistol 001.000.000.237.190.000.00 435.00 Total :435.00 128578 10/27/2011 073757 DEX MEDIA WEST INC 651150804 CEMETERY ADVERTISING YELLOW PAGES ADVERTISING FOR CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.200.440.00 419.40 Total :419.40 128579 10/27/2011 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 11-3235 MINUTE TAKING 9Page: Packet Page 29 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128579 10/27/2011 (Continued)064531 DINES, JEANNIE 10/11 & 10/18 Council Minutes 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 390.00 Total :390.00 128580 10/27/2011 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 40916 SUPPLIES FUEL HOSE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.09 Total :1.05 128581 10/27/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-26950 LIFT STATION #3 LIFT STATION #3 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 55.99 Total :55.99 128582 10/27/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 477.66 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM1-00825 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 852.09 SPRINKLER1-00875 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 55.85 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER1-02125 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 70.02 SPRINKLER1-03900 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 72.38 SPRINKLER1-05125 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 81.83 GAZEBO IRRIGATION1-05285 10Page: Packet Page 30 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128582 10/27/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION GAZEBO IRRIGATION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 27.50 CORNER PARK1-05340 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 65.30 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05650 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 27.50 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP1-05675 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 826.10 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05700 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 152.70 CORNER PARK1-09650 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 51.12 SW CORNER SPRINKLER1-09800 SW CORNER SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 53.49 PLANTER1-10780 PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 70.02 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH1-16130 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 58.21 CORNER PARKS1-16300 CORNER PARKS 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 136.16 118 5TH AVE N1-16420 118 5TH AVE N 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 48.76 CITY HALL TRIANGLE1-16450 CITY HALL TRIANGLE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 210.00 11Page: Packet Page 31 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128582 10/27/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX1-16630 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 48.76 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER1-17475 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 88.92 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD1-19950 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 55.86 1141 9TH AVE S1-36255 1141 9TH AVE S 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 48.76 Total :3,578.99 128583 10/27/2011 069878 EDMONDS-WESTGATE VET HOSPITAL 159051 INV#159051 CLIENT#5118 - EDMONDS PD FELV 2ND VAC - IMP#8427 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.00 FVRCP BOOSTER - IMP#8427 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.00 SPAY DOG - IMPOUND #8446 001.000.410.521.700.490.01 109.75 DHLPP BOOSTER - IMP#8446 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.00 BORDETELLA BOOSTER - IMP#8446 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.00 RABIES BOOSTER - IMP#8446 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.00 Total :159.75 128584 10/27/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 069425 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.230.512.501.450.00 26.54 Total :26.54 128585 10/27/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 069659 ZSYST MK0315 PRINTER MAINTENANCE 12Page: Packet Page 32 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128585 10/27/2011 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES Maintenace for printers - combined 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 22.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 2.18 Total :25.15 128586 10/27/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 069828 MK0653 COPIER CONTRACT 411.000.656.538.800.450.41 21.74 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.41 2.07 Total :23.81 128587 10/27/2011 073837 ENERGY INDUSTRIES LLC 2011-108 C-366 LIGHTING RETROFIT PROJECT C-366 LIGHTING RETROFIT PROJECT 414.000.656.594.320.410.10 20,878.10 9.5% Sales Tax 414.000.656.594.320.410.10 1,983.42 Total :22,861.52 128588 10/27/2011 008969 ENGLAND, CHARLES ENGLAND14651 SATURDAY NIGHT DANCE CLASSES DANCE CLASS #14651 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 280.00 DANCE CLASS #14649 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 280.00 Total :560.00 128589 10/27/2011 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU24252 Traffic Control - Bolts for Barricade Traffic Control - Bolts for Barricade 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 23.21 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.20 Total :25.41 128590 10/27/2011 067042 FINAL TOUCH FINISHING KING14527 ETIQUETTE CLASS 13Page: Packet Page 33 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128590 10/27/2011 (Continued)067042 FINAL TOUCH FINISHING ETIQUETTE: YOUNG LADIES & GENTLEMEN 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 450.00 Total :450.00 128591 10/27/2011 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH14598 IRISH DANCE CLASSES IRISH DANCE 13+ #14598 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 400.40 Total :400.40 128592 10/27/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-775-2455 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 50.41 FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 111.10 Total :161.51 128593 10/27/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0423 AFTER HOURS PHONE AFTER HOURS PHONE 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 56.74 Total :56.74 128594 10/27/2011 073821 GEODESIGN INC 26281 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 9/30/11 E1JA.Services thru 9/30/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 1,077.23 Total :1,077.23 128595 10/27/2011 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA GLEISNER14602 TAI CHI & QIGONG TAI CHI #14602 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 784.00 TAI CHI #14604 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 332.50 TAI CHI #14606 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 245.00 QIGONG #14608 14Page: Packet Page 34 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128595 10/27/2011 (Continued)068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 629.30 QIGONG #14610 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 329.70 Total :2,320.50 128596 10/27/2011 073625 GREEN FUTURES LAB, UW 06-9132 EDMOND Special District Plans for 5 Corners & Special District Plans for 5 Corners & 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 15,661.00 Total :15,661.00 128597 10/27/2011 065733 HANN, LYNNE HANN1025 CONTEST WINNER CONTEST WINNER - "ESSENTIALLY EDMONDS" 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 50.00 Total :50.00 128598 10/27/2011 064721 HATZENBUHLER, HAROLD 71 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 176.00 Total :176.00 128599 10/27/2011 071417 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD 3807895 BNSF Maint St Double Track - Pipe BNSF Maint St Double Track - Pipe 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 1,236.96 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 117.50 Storm - Pipe Stock3808004 Storm - Pipe Stock 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 1,054.88 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 100.21 Total :2,509.55 128600 10/27/2011 070042 IKON 85768299 INV#85768299 ACCT#467070-1005305A3 COPIER RENTAL 10/13 TO 11/12/11 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 340.00 15Page: Packet Page 35 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128600 10/27/2011 (Continued)070042 IKON ADDITIONAL IMAGES 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 267.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 57.76 Total :665.71 128601 10/27/2011 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 5021039900 Additional Copies/DSD Small Copier in Additional Copies/DSD Small Copier in 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 6.99 Total :6.99 128602 10/27/2011 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 1964571 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 169.07 SUPPLIES1967738 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 144.52 Total :313.59 128603 10/27/2011 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 1964409 226961 BINDERS/TABS 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 159.01 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 15.11 Total :174.12 128604 10/27/2011 065980 ISS WONDERWARE 401621 WONDERWARE RENEWAL WONDERWARE RENEWAL 411.000.656.538.800.410.22 8,225.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.22 781.38 Total :9,006.38 128605 10/27/2011 066032 J BOZEAT & ASSOCIATES LLC J3088A/1 J3088 ROTORK VALVE/BUSHING 16Page: Packet Page 36 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128605 10/27/2011 (Continued)066032 J BOZEAT & ASSOCIATES LLC 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7,596.00 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 420.71 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 761.59 Total :8,778.30 128606 10/27/2011 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 526109 54278825 HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION 411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,443.29 Total :3,443.29 128607 10/27/2011 072146 JOHNSON, BREANNE 10192011 MONITOR FOR 10/19/11 EDC MEETING Monitor for 10/19/11 Economic Dev 001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00 Total :36.00 128608 10/27/2011 067330 KAR-VEL CONSTRUCTION INC E0JA/E7JA.Pmt 6 E0JA/E7JA.PAYMENT 6 THRU 9/20/11 E0JA/E7JA.Payment 6 thru 9/20/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 346,844.32 E0JA/E7JA.Ret 6 412.100.000.223.400.000.00 -15,837.64 Total :331,006.68 128609 10/27/2011 061253 KEN HEANY-INPRA EXEC DIRECTOR DILL2012 PACIFIC NW RESOURCE MGMT SCHOOL REGISTRATION FOR DEBRA DILL: PACIFIC 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 1,185.00 Total :1,185.00 128610 10/27/2011 073136 LANG, ROBERT LANG1023 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR PLAZA ROOM MONITOR 10/23/11 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 105.00 Total :105.00 128611 10/27/2011 073657 LAW OFFICE OF DILLON G SMITH 10192011 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 17Page: Packet Page 37 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128611 10/27/2011 (Continued)073657 LAW OFFICE OF DILLON G SMITH 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 600.00 Total :600.00 128612 10/27/2011 072059 LEE, NICOLE 765 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 123.96 INTERPRETER FEE767 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 123.96 INTERPRETER FEE768 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 123.96 INTERPRETER FEE820 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 123.96 Total :495.84 128613 10/27/2011 073852 MALONEY, SUZY MALONEY1018 REIMBURSEMENT FOR WOTS EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT FOR WOTS SUPPLIES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 347.12 Total :347.12 128614 10/27/2011 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 714 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE715 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE716 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE734 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE805 18Page: Packet Page 38 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128614 10/27/2011 (Continued)069362 MARSHALL, CITA INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE806 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE807 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE808 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE818 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 Total :794.88 128615 10/27/2011 071011 MIDCO-WEST INC 460000676 25680 FORK LIFT RENTAL 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 200.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 19.00 Total :219.00 128616 10/27/2011 020495 MIDWAY PLYWOOD INC C60365 Parks - Milltown Courtyard Project - Parks - Milltown Courtyard Project - 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 215.55 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 20.48 Total :236.03 128617 10/27/2011 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 136739 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT SUPPLIES MILLTOWN PROJECT: LOADER 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 375.00 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 35.62 19Page: Packet Page 39 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128617 10/27/2011 (Continued)020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC STIHL BLOWER136991 STIHL BLOWER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 24.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.37 SUPPLIES137046 VALVE SETTING KIT, FUEL LINE KIT, FUEL 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 21.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.08 Total :461.92 128618 10/27/2011 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 135947 Traffic Control - Propane Traffic Control - Propane 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 8.38 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 0.80 Total :9.18 128619 10/27/2011 069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA23-244426 PLUG/OIL SEALS/BALL BRGS PLUG/OIL SEALS/BALL BRGS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 212.24 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 16.58 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 21.74 Total :250.56 128620 10/27/2011 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 11-1196-9 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 9/30/11 E1JA.Services thru 9/30/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 434.94 E0JA.SERVICES THRU 9/30/1111-1264-1 E0JA.Services thru 9/30/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 1,986.00 20Page: Packet Page 40 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :2,420.9412862010/27/2011 072746 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 128621 10/27/2011 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 3287853 MILLTOWN PROJECT TEMPORARY PANELS FOR MILLTOWN PROJECT 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 536.28 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 50.95 Total :587.23 128622 10/27/2011 073848 NEWITT, TOM NEWITT1001 CONTEST WINNER FIRST PLACE WINNER IN "ESSENTIALLY 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 200.00 Total :200.00 128623 10/27/2011 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 25613 260 SODIUM BISULFITE 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 812.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 77.14 Total :889.14 128624 10/27/2011 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-366848 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HUMMINGBIRD PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-367367 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL, STANDARD AND 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 1,141.66 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-370201 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HAINES WHARF PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 220.77 Total :1,474.78 128625 10/27/2011 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 245 Planning Board Minutes 10/12/11 Planning Board Minutes 10/12/11 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 256.00 Total :256.00 21Page: Packet Page 41 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128626 10/27/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 855581 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 58.09 Total :58.09 128627 10/27/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 890406 Office supplies - council office, 2010 Office supplies - council office, 2010 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 39.59 Desk Calendar for Council President's890440 Desk Calendar for Council President's 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 10.95 Council Office Supplies - power strip,927297 Council Office Supplies - power strip, 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 73.76 Total :124.30 128628 10/27/2011 068709 OFFICETEAM 34169150 TEMP SERVICES Temp help Clerk's office 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 117.59 Total :117.59 128629 10/27/2011 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 122338 Strom Dump Fees Strom Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 84.00 Storm Dump Fees122346 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 105.00 Storm Dump Fees122353 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 105.00 Storm Dump Fees122361 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 105.00 Storm Dump Fees122913 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 63.00 22Page: Packet Page 42 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128629 10/27/2011 (Continued)027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS Storm Dump Fees122919 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 73.50 Total :535.50 128630 10/27/2011 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.023022604 PAINT SUPPLIES ENAMEL, TRAY 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 24.54 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.33 Total :26.87 128631 10/27/2011 008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC PCASH1025 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 2.19 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 10.92 ZOO ADMISSION FOR PARK MAINTENANCE 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 40.25 SISTER CITY PARKING @ AIRPORT 138.200.210.557.210.490.00 6.00 SUPPLIES FOR WRITE ON THE SOUND 2011 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 25.73 SAW BLADE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 50.48 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT PATTERNS 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 73.34 GYMNASTICS SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 20.49 SUPPLIES FOR WRITE ON THE SOUND 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 13.10 Total :242.50 128632 10/27/2011 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 195882 H20 UPS GROUND LNI 23Page: Packet Page 43 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128632 10/27/2011 (Continued)071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 9.70 Total :9.70 128633 10/27/2011 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER Pier StormWater Rent for Oct 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 2,153.25 Total :2,153.25 128634 10/27/2011 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 Old PW - Security 11/1/11-1/31/12 Old PW - Security 11/1/11-1/31/12 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 102.20 FS 16 - Security 11/1/11-1/31/12 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 102.39 Total :204.59 128635 10/27/2011 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET PROTZ14392 FELDENKRAIS FELDENKRAIS #14392 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 435.17 Total :435.17 128636 10/27/2011 073819 ROCK SOLID LEARNING LLC ROCKSOLID14653 MARVELOUS MINERALS CLASS MARVELOUS MINERALS #14653 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 81.00 Total :81.00 128637 10/27/2011 073846 ROLL, HOWARD ROLL102011 REFUND REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 48.00 Total :48.00 128638 10/27/2011 065784 RUDD COMPANY INC INV-105890 Traffic Control - Paint Truck - Gun Traffic Control - Paint Truck - Gun 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2,132.75 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 9.70 9.5% Sales Tax 24Page: Packet Page 44 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128638 10/27/2011 (Continued)065784 RUDD COMPANY INC 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 203.54 Total :2,345.99 128639 10/27/2011 067474 SHAW, BENSON 2011-08/05 CEDAR DREAMS PROVIDE/INSTALL 12 MOSAIC DISKS/CEDAR 117.200.640.575.500.410.00 300.00 9.5% Sales Tax 117.200.640.575.500.410.00 1.10 Total :301.10 128640 10/27/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200202562 SCHOOL LIGHT 20829 76TH W STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 31.04 SIGNAL LIGHT 84TH & 220TH200348233 Signal Light at 84th & 220th 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 69.07 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN200865202 LIFT STATION #3 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 117.80 SIGNAL LIGHT 20408 76TH201192226 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 41.00 STREET LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W201582152 STREET LIGHT 19600 80th Ave W 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 39.94 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH W201611951 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 41.11 TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH SW201907862 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 39.55 Lift Station #6 100 Pine St202087870 Lift Station #6 100 Pine St 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 268.74 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99202289120 25Page: Packet Page 45 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128640 10/27/2011 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 99.45 Total :747.70 128641 10/27/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2004-9314-6 19827 89TH PL W 19827 89TH PL W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.02 Total :30.02 128642 10/27/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 New Acct 5th/Main 5th & Main Charging Stations - New 5th & Main Charging Stations - New 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,043.00 Total :1,043.00 128643 10/27/2011 037800 SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT CEDM Street Storm 2 Blood Draws, HEP B Street Storm 2 Blood Draws, HEP B 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 68.00 Street Storm 2 Blood Draws, HEP B 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 68.00 Total :136.00 128644 10/27/2011 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 10132011 104757 ASH DISPOEAL 411.000.656.538.800.474.65 3,686.64 Total :3,686.64 128645 10/27/2011 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO Nov 2011 Standard NOVEMBER 2011 STANDARD INSURANCE PREMIUM November 2011 Standard Insurance 811.000.000.231.550.000.00 13,358.23 Total :13,358.23 128646 10/27/2011 063308 STATE OF WASHINGTON 2-24650 RE: #7-0910-031 UTILITY REFUND #7-0910-031 Vannoy/Ames 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 66.24 RE: 4201-1351745 UTILITY REFUND2-27775 Utility Refund 4201-1351745 26Page: Packet Page 46 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128646 10/27/2011 (Continued)063308 STATE OF WASHINGTON 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 58.19 RE: 30028942-326 JG1 UTILITY REFUND4-08850 Fleck / Fraker UB Refund 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 104.94 RE: 40015506-803 PM3 UTILITY REFUND7-01500 40015506-803 PM3 Utility Refund 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 33.73 RE: 09-481-JMO UTILITY REFUND8-35750 Cimino / Powell UB Refund 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 6.27 Total :269.37 128647 10/27/2011 068593 STEVE JENSEN STUDIOS JENSEN1021 SCULPTURES FOR FLOWER POLES COMMISSION OF 3 SCULPTURES ATOP FLOWER 127.200.640.573.200.410.00 1,320.00 Total :1,320.00 128648 10/27/2011 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 2623962 Milltown Project - Elect Supplies Milltown Project - Elect Supplies 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 1,023.82 Freight 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 18.87 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 99.06 PS - Elect SuppliesS002949381.001 PS - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 674.86 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 64.11 Milltown Project - Elect SuppliesS100000032.002 Milltown Project - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 350.15 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 33.26 Milltown Project - Elect Caddy'sS100001700.001 27Page: Packet Page 47 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128648 10/27/2011 (Continued)040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY Milltown Project - Elect Caddy's 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 50.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.81 Total :2,319.54 128649 10/27/2011 070864 SUPERMEDIA LLC 440011164360 C/A 430001405909 P&R Directory Listing 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 132.50 C/A 440001304654440011166181 Basic e-commerce hosting 10/02/11 - 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 Domain forwarding 09/22/11 - 10/21/11 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 2.00 C/A 440001307733440011166221 10/2011 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 Total :204.40 128650 10/27/2011 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10219139 Storm - UpSide Down Paint , Pok-It Tool Storm - UpSide Down Paint , Pok-It Tool 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 726.85 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 69.05 Traffic Control - Steel Lag Screws,10221696 Traffic Control - Steel Lag Screws, 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 195.26 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 18.55 Total :1,009.71 128651 10/27/2011 073621 TANIMURA, NAOAKI TANIMURA14572 KENDO CLASSES KENDO #14572 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 262.60 KENDO #14570 28Page: Packet Page 48 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128651 10/27/2011 (Continued)073621 TANIMURA, NAOAKI 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 124.80 Total :387.40 128652 10/27/2011 067375 TERRACON CONSULTANTS INC T252167 E7CB.SERVICES THRU 10/1/11 E7CB.Services thru 10/1/11 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 371.35 Total :371.35 128653 10/27/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY I01752775-10052011 E1CA.RFQ ADVERTISMENT E1CA.RFQ Advertisment 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 227.28 Total :227.28 128654 10/27/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1753551 RFQ/RFP - Consultant Services ad RFQ/RFP - Consultant Services ad 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 268.56 Total :268.56 128655 10/27/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1754034 NEWSPAPER ADS 2012 Budget Hearing 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 82.80 NEWSPAPER AD1754035 Hearing Comp Plan Map adjust 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 58.60 NEWSPAPER AD1754036 Public Hearing on Rev. Source 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 43.12 Total :184.52 128656 10/27/2011 065459 THE HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 10015985 1 Yr Subscription - PW Admin - 11/11/11 1 Yr Subscription - PW Admin - 11/11/11 001.000.650.519.910.490.00 177.00 Total :177.00 128657 10/27/2011 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 320431 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 29Page: Packet Page 49 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128657 10/27/2011 (Continued)027269 THE PART WORKS INC 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 210.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 19.98 Total :230.28 128658 10/27/2011 041960 TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC 43720 L.S. #8 FENCE UPDATES L.S. #8 Fence Updates 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 3,493.05 Total :3,493.05 128659 10/27/2011 041960 TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC 43650 Shop Fence Repair Supplies Shop Fence Repair Supplies 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 57.20 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 5.44 Total :62.64 128660 10/27/2011 073581 TRUAX, KAILEY TRUAX1022 PLAZA ROOM & GYM MONITOR PLAZA ROOM & GYM MONITOR~ 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 39.00 Total :39.00 128661 10/27/2011 062693 US BANK 8313 ENG CREDIT CARD 9/2011.ZUALAUF CESCL TRA Eng Credit Card 9/2011.Zulauf CESCL 001.000.620.532.200.490.00 200.00 Total :200.00 128662 10/27/2011 062693 US BANK 4675 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 105.44 ANTIBACTERIAL WIPES 001.000.640.575.540.310.00 83.90 COMPASS 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 60.24 BIKE RACK FOR INTERURBAN TRAIL 30Page: Packet Page 50 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128662 10/27/2011 (Continued)062693 US BANK 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 601.50 LUNCHES FOR WRITE ON THE SOUND 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 951.70 WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 8.97 WOTS PRESENTER JOHN DANIEL'S ROOM 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 224.98 CHALK & NAME BADGES FOR WOTS 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 28.66 WOTS PRESENTER ALICE ORR'S ROOM 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 224.98 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 109.41 Total :2,399.78 128663 10/27/2011 062693 US BANK 3363 Fisheries Supply - Unit M-16 - Mach Fisheries Supply - Unit M-16 - Mach 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 103.20 Shop Supplies - Hookup Wire 511.000.657.548.680.311.00 56.11 King Salmon Marine - Unit M16 -O Ring 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 68.13 OReilly Auto - Unit 58 - Holddown Kit 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.46 Total :232.90 128664 10/27/2011 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA0383564-WA Street - DOT Street - DOT 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 65.00 Total :65.00 128665 10/27/2011 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 503934 Traffic Control - Night Signs Center, Traffic Control - Night Signs Center, 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 263.85 Freight 31Page: Packet Page 51 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128665 10/27/2011 (Continued)064423 USA BLUE BOOK 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 25.91 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 27.53 Traffic Control - Traffic Sign Stand508423 Traffic Control - Traffic Sign Stand 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 136.95 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 24.15 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 15.30 Total :493.69 128666 10/27/2011 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS U0298897J INV#U0298897J - EDMONDS PD PAGER SERVICE 10/27 TO 11/26/11 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 47.57 Total :47.57 128667 10/27/2011 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 1020995534 C/A 671247844-00001 Cell Service-Bldg 001.000.620.524.100.420.00 96.72 Cell Service-Eng 001.000.620.532.200.420.00 158.49 Cell Service Fac-Maint 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 77.82 Cell Service-Parks Discovery Program 001.000.640.574.350.420.00 13.44 Cell Service Parks Maint 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 75.63 Cell Service-PD 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 508.17 Cell Service-PW Street 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 27.53 Cell Service-PW Storm 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 30.02 Cell Service-PW Water 32Page: Packet Page 52 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128667 10/27/2011 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 140.11 Cell Service-PW Sewer 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 52.19 Cell Service-WWTP 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 40.07 Total :1,220.19 128668 10/27/2011 067216 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO 42706 FS 16, 17, 20 - Testing, Pipe Exam and FS 16, 17, 20 - Testing, Pipe Exam and 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 4,899.95 9.5% Sales Tax 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 465.50 Total :5,365.45 128669 10/27/2011 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 25924048 Alecia Cox - clerical services (w/e Alecia Cox - clerical services (w/e 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 839.20 Total :839.20 128670 10/27/2011 047200 WA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC 11-665 RICH LINDSAY/MID YEAR CONFERENCE MID YEAR CONFERENCE REGISTRATION: RICH 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 99.00 Total :99.00 128671 10/27/2011 073758 WASHINGTON TRACTOR INC 04 4020049 CEMETERY SUPPLIES CEMETERY MOWER SUPPLIES 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 141.85 Freight 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 10.50 9.5% Sales Tax 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 14.47 Total :166.82 128672 10/27/2011 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 06-8581 Tree Removal at 18624 84th Ave W Tree Removal at 18624 84th Ave W 33Page: Packet Page 53 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128672 10/27/2011 (Continued)067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 280.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 26.60 Bush Clearing at 8525 192nd Ave W06-8582 Bush Clearing at 8525 192nd Ave W 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 140.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 13.30 Total :459.90 128673 10/27/2011 073849 WEINBERG, MARC WEINBERG1003 CONTEST WINNER SECOND PLACE WINNER OF "ESSENTIALLY 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00 Total :100.00 128674 10/27/2011 049500 WEST PUBLISHING 823683290 LAW MANUALS LAW MANUALS 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 254.60 Total :254.60 128675 10/27/2011 064008 WETLANDS & WOODLANDS 45124001 YOST ARBOR DAY PLANNING YOST ARBOR DAY PLANTING 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 210.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 19.95 Total :229.95 128676 10/27/2011 073479 WU, THOMAS 1117 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 146.85 Total :146.85 128677 10/27/2011 051282 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 0151150 Street - Signs 48"x48" Econolite Blanks Street - Signs 48"x48" Econolite Blanks 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 387.36 34Page: Packet Page 54 of 124 10/27/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 8:07:46AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 128677 10/27/2011 (Continued)051282 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 38.72 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 40.48 Total :466.56 Bank total :511,917.46135 Vouchers for bank code :front 511,917.46Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report135 35Page: Packet Page 55 of 124 AM-4319   Item #: 2. D. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Department:Community Services Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information  Information Subject Title Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October, 2011. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative As requested by the City Council, this report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Attachments Attachment 1 - Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October, 2011 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 10:03 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/28/2011 10:07 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 10:20 AM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 10/28/2011 09:42 AM Final Approval Date: 10/28/2011  Packet Page 56 of 124 City of Edmonds  Community Services Date: October 26, 2011 To: Mayor Cooper and City Council members From: Stephen Clifton, AICP Community Services and Economic Development Director Subject: Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report – October, 2011 As requested by the City Council, this report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Community Services I. EDMONDS CROSSING Project Description Edmonds Crossing is a regional project intended to provide a long-term solution to current operational and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds and along State Route 104. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and City of Edmonds propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street, in downtown Edmonds, to Pt. Edwards, south of the downtown core. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. A realigned SR 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street would provide access. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity passenger (Amtrak) and commuter rail (Sounder) service; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities that allow both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers to utilize various transportation modes; parking, drop-off areas, retail/ concessionaire space, waiting areas; and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – No significant activities. City of Edmonds Community Services Department Economic Development Department Packet Page 57 of 124 2 II. SOUND TRANSIT (PHASE 1, AKA SOUND MOVE) Project Description During the past several years, Sound Transit has been implementing what is called the Sound Move Plan. One element calls for commuter rail services, otherwise known as Sounder. Commuter rail will eventually link Everett in the north with Seattle, Tacoma and Lakewood in the South, a total of 82 miles through three counties. Sounder is being implemented in three phases, one of which includes Everett to Seattle or the North Commuter Rail corridor. Three commuter rail stations exist along this corridor, i.e., Everett, Mukilteo and Edmonds. Everett-Seattle Sounder, at full operation, now calls for 8 trains per day, i.e., four round trips, and will include reverse trips. This is a reduction of two round trips from the originally proposed operational plan. The first roundtrip train run began in December, 2003. Edmonds Station is currently located between Main and Dayton Streets along both sides of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks. The station area is also co-located with Amtrak’s Edmonds Passenger Station. The Sounder commuter rail station, once completed will include ADA accessible rail platforms, shelters, signage, lighting fixtures, hanging flower baskets, ticket vending machines, on-site parking, and Community Transit bus station. In an attempt to enhance Willow Creek and the Edmonds Marsh, a culvert has been installed near the Marina Beach property beneath both BNSF Railroad tracks, concurrent with the construction of a second BNSF rail line. This will allow for the eventual daylighting of Willow Creek, if and/or when funding is available to design and construct the project. Significant Activities since July 21, 2011 • July - October, 2011 – Sound Transit’s Edmonds Commuter Rail Station is now open and functional. Amenities include a new train platform and larger passenger loading area; new transit shelters, paved parking lots and secure bike lockers; and upgraded lighting (forthcoming), signage (forthcoming) and landscaping. • October 3, 2011 - A new transit center for Community Transit buses opened October, 2011 and is located at the north end of the Sound Transit Edmonds Commuter Rail Station. The new facility improves connections between buses, trains and ferries. Find more information at: www.soundtransit.org/edmondsstation. One issue that has been raised since the opening of the project is parking. More specifically, the City has received several complaints from people not being able to find parking within the Sound Transit parking lot. In response to inquiries about the parking situation, I have noted in recent e-mails to commuters that the parking loss is a result of constructing the Sound Transit Edmonds Station. In order to accommodate a limited Phase 1 budget, and install necessary amenities such as rail platforms, walkways, a community transit station, etc., only a limited amount of parking is available between the rail lines and private property/WSDOT parking lot abutting the east edge of the project. Packet Page 58 of 124 3 Sound Transit and Community Transit require the areas between Dayton and Main Streets for operational purposes. City staff recognized early in the planning process that Sound Transit would need to eventually provide additional parking for the Sound Transit Edmonds Station project. This is why I worked with Sound Transit staff to include voter approved project Sound Transit N23A into Sound Transit 2 project. The project includes adding up to 300 parking stalls for a permanent Sound Transit Edmonds Station. Unfortunately, the Sound Transit Board has removed this project from the list, at the objection of the City, due to the economy and reductions in the collection of sales taxes. The City and Sound Transit have discussed how Sound Transit intends to start planning for additional parking. To assist with parking demand, the Port of Edmonds has, in the past, leased parking to Sound Transit just south of Dayton and abutting the west edge of the BNSF rail lines. The Port of Edmonds is willing to continue leasing property, if Sound Transit requests such. There is also an opportunity for the Port of Edmonds to charge for extended long term parking. Much of the parking within proximity of the WSF Ferry Terminal and downtown/waterfront areas has a three hour limit; the purpose is to ensure that those areas surrounding popular attractions such as waterfront beaches, underwater dive park, restaurants……….in addition to commercial and residential areas, have parking stalls that are available to all users at least every three hours and not utilized for all day parking. The City realizes that this is problematic for those trying to commute using transit options or for those riding a WSF ferry wishing to leave their car on the east side of Puget Sound, but a balance needs to be achieved for all users. During an August 2, 2011Sound Transit presentation to the Edmonds City Council regarding Sound Transit activities, City Council members raised the issue of how Sound Transit intends to provide additional parking for the Sounder Edmonds Station, which could help with parking nearby. In response, Sound Transit recently restriped the station parking areas and designated some reserve spaces for general use. This netted an additional 8 spaces within the station parking area. Sound Transit is currently working to identify additional possible parking spots and has presented a draft proposal to City Staff for their review. We will update the City Council after we review the proposal. Packet Page 59 of 124 4 III. SOUND TRANSIT 2 Expanding the regional mass transit system On Nov. 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region approved a Sound Transit 2 ballot measure. The plan adds regional express bus and commuter rail service while building 36 additional miles of light rail to form a 55-mile regional system. For additional information, visit http://soundtransit.org/. Significant Activities since July 21, 2011 • October 11, 13, and 18, 2011 – With the completion of the alternative analysis work, Sound Transit’s next step is to begin the EIS scoping process that will lead them into the Environmental Impact Statement phase of the project. Sound Transit conducted three public scoping meetings on October 11, 13, and 18, 2011. Notices were placed on the City’s website, Government Channel and forwarded to the City Council, Planning Board and Economic Development Commission. The scoping period will last through October 31. Sound Transit will be updating their website with additional details and information as this process progresses. IV. UNOCAL AKA CHEVRON SITE CLEANUP Project Description The UNOCAL property currently consists of a lower yard which currently contains petroleum contamination resulting from more than 60 years of operation. Chevron, which acquired UNOCAL, is now the entity responsible for cleaning up the site. Cleanup work at the lower yard, which began in 2007, was a continuation of remediation work that has been ongoing at the site since 2001. Chevron conducted cleanup work from summer 2007 through fall 2008 and has since been monitoring the site since. Significant Activities since July 21, 2011 • The following was provided to the City of Edmonds by the Department of Ecology on April 19, 2011. Significant progress has been made at the Unocal Edmonds site, but more remains to be done. Excavation efforts have removed much of the contamination. Ground water monitoring was conducted from October 2008 to October 2010 to assess whether excavation has successfully removed the floating product from the site and reduced petroleum concentrations in ground water to below cleanup levels. Unfortunately, this is not the case. There is a floating product in one compliance well that is generally only about a tenth of an inch thick, but has been as thick as an inch and a half. In addition, several point of compliance wells have petroleum concentrations above the cleanup level. The cleanup level is 506 μg/L for the eastern part of the site and 706 μg/L for the western part of the site. The Department of Ecology (DOE), Washington State Ferries, and the Edmonds Citizens Awareness Committee are currently reviewing the ground water monitoring results and Packet Page 60 of 124 5 will be meeting on May 25, 2011 to discuss. The next step in the process is to prepare a feasibility study to assess how to remove the remaining contamination. Chevron is also planning to conduct some tests to assess groundwater hydraulics of the site after all the excavation and backfilling; a feasibility study work plan will then be prepared and conducted. In summary, very significant progress has been made, but work remains to be done. The DOE does not have a schedule yet, beyond developing the feasibility study work plan in the next few months. DOE would probably be hoping to do construction in the 2012 construction season, but 2013 may be more realistic given the length of time a feasibility study may take to prepare. V. EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT Overview The City Council, pursuant to state law, approved the formation of the Public Facilities District (PFD) at its April 24, 2001 meeting. A PFD is a separate municipal corporation that has authority to undertake the design, construction, operation, promotion and financing of a Regional Center in the city. The Public Facilities District board consists of five members originally appointed by the City Council on June 19, 2001. Phase 1A renovation of the original Edmonds High School Auditorium into a first class Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and multipurpose facility was completed in September of 2006. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – City staff have been attending Edmonds Center for the Arts tasks force meetings recently to help address funding issues related to the Public Facilities District ability to pay its debt service tied to capital expenditures. • October 4, 2011 – Joe McIalwain, Edmonds Center for the Arts Executive Director, provided a quarterly report update to the Edmonds City Council. VI. SNOHOMISH COUNTY PAINE FIELD Overview On July 14, 2004, a Mead & Hunt Inc. Business Travel Survey was issued which focused on the market potential and options for Paine Field. On August 20, 2004, a Snohomish County Citizen Cabinet issued an Economic Development Final Report -Blueprint for the Economic Future of Snohomish County. Both reports put Paine Field in the regional spotlight as they highlight the possibility of using Paine Field for commercial aircraft operations, thus changing its general aviation status. Although Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon and some County Council members have said they do not support commercial air service at Paine Field, federal law obligates the county to accommodate commercial service. Federal law does not allow the county to Packet Page 61 of 124 6 prohibit or limit scheduled passenger air service. Instead, it requires that the county negotiate with the airlines in good faith to accommodate their proposed service. Horizon Airlines has indicated it wants to operate four times a day to Portland and twice per day to Spokane, using 75-seat Bombardier Q400 turboprop airplanes on both routes. Allegiant has said it plans to operate twice a week to Las Vegas, using 150-seat MD83 jet aircraft. Before airlines may begin commercial service, the FAA must amend the county’s operating certificate for Paine Field as well as the airlines’ operating specifications. The county was required to prepare an environmental assessment for FAA approval before those amendments can occur. Key points of the draft environmental assessment include: 1. Considering all current aircraft operations (take offs and landings) at Paine Field. 2. Traffic mitigation. 3. Emissions affecting air quality. The draft environmental assessment is available for review at the airport office, on the Paine Field Web site http://www.painefield.com/airserviceea.html, at www.snoco.org/departments/airport and also in local public libraries. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – No new information at this time. VII. RAILROAD QUIET ZONE Overview As discussed in the past, there is an expressed desire of the City Council and Port of Edmonds to establish a full or partial quite zone along the City's shoreline. A quiet zone is a section of rail line that contains one or more consecutive public crossings at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – No new information at this time. VIII. CITY OF EDMONDS / COMCAST FRANCHISE AGREEMENT Overview With a record of successfully negotiating Verizon franchise agreements, several members of the North Puget Sound Consortium formed a Consortium for the purposes of negotiating franchise agreements with Comcast. Jurisdictions invited to participate include: Snohomish County, the Cities of Bothell, Carnation, Edmonds, Kenmore, Lake Forest Park, Mercer Island, Shoreline, Woodinville, and the Town of Woodway. Benefits of a coordinated effort include: ensuring that the public receives the maximum rights and benefits from their Packet Page 62 of 124 7 respective franchise agreements; better coordination of negotiations with Comcast; sharing the costs of negotiations including hiring a national consultant and attorneys to assure the citizens of each jurisdiction that their franchise is competitive, both locally and nationally; and creating a common template and negotiation strategy through the assistance of a national consultant and attorneys to maximize leverage during the negotiations. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – The North Puget Sound Consortium agreement template was completed in 2010 and Ogden Murphy Wallace (OMW) was reviewing the agreement with their clients (includes the City of Edmonds). As referenced in past correspondence, the Comcast Franchise expired on April 26, 2011. Although I was prepared to meet with OMW and Comcast as needed to finalize renewal of the franchise, a change in legal counsel for the City altered the timetable for completing the review in a timely manner. I am now working with Michael R. Bradley Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC (a Lighthouse Law Group subcontractor), to finalize a draft franchise agreement tailored to meet the needs of Edmonds. NOTE: It’s possible to have the franchise agreement expire but still have a franchisee continue paying revenue to a City while operating. Comcast is still paying franchise fees to the City of Edmonds in the absence of a renewed franchise agreement. Economic Development I. PARTNERSHIPS Goal 1, Policy 1a of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan is to promote a results- oriented permit and licensing process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October 2011 – The Development Services Planning Manager and Building Official have been meeting with me to discuss potential changes in operations to improve development review efficiencies. One process that has been highly successful and very well received by the development community is meeting with developers, at no cost, prior to submitting a formal preliminary development review application. This allows a developer team to learn about various issues related to their proposal prior to investing large sums of money into a formal design and permitting process. I attend these meetings regularly to introduce myself to developers and their representatives, learn about the proposal, and to discuss possible solutions to any potential obstacles that arise. Goal 1 of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: ”foster a healthy business community that provides employment and other economic opportunities.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 Packet Page 63 of 124 8 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – Economic Development staff continue recruiting businesses to the City of Edmonds. One of the more recent businesses, i.e., Dick’s Drive In Restaurants, held a grand opening ceremony on October 20, 2011. According to various estimates, approximately 1,000 people attended the event. The event was highlighted on TV news programs as well as written about in several print and on-line newspapers. Economic Development Commission Overview On June 2, 2009 – The City Council approved Ordinance 3735 which creates a new Citizens Economic Development Commission (EDC) in order to determine new strategies for economic development within the City and identify new sources of revenues. In conjunction with the Planning Board, the new commission is to review and consider strategies designed to improve commercial viability, tourism development, and activity. The ED Commission consists of 17 members appointed by the Mayor and the City Council. The commission is staffed by the City’s Economic Development Director and Executive Assistant. Frances Chapin and Rob Chave also attend regularly. The Commission is to make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, as well as to other City boards or commissions as appropriate, regarding economic development strategies. The commission will provide an annual report and the commission is scheduled to end on December 31, 2011. Minutes from monthly meetings (once approved by the Edmonds EDC) can be found at http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/EconDevMinutes.stm. As noted in past Quarterly reports, the Economic Development Commission agreed that the six higher priority recommendations presented to the City Council in January, 2009 would fall within four categories called Strategic Planning and Visioning; Technology; Land Use; and Tourism; a subgroup was formed for each category. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July 19, 2011 – The City Council voted to authorize the Mayor to sign a professional services agreement (with an amended Exhibit A.1) with Beckwith Consulting Group (BCG) to lead the Strategic Planning and Visioning process. • August 17, 2011 – The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. The Strategic Planning and Visioning; Technology; Land Use; and Tourism sub groups all presented updates. Additional topics of discussion included the September 24, 2011 Strategic Planning and Visioning retreat and possible new initiatives. • September 24, 2011 – A Strategic Planning Kick Off meeting took place and was attended by the City Council, Planning Board, Economic Development Commission and Citizens. Since that time, City staff have been preparing a list of Stakeholders which will be used for future interviews, and Beckwith Consulting group has been working with staff on press releases, Stakeholder, business, customer, visitor, events, and youth surveys. Additionally, Beckwith Consulting Group has begun a scan of existing conditions related to Edmonds, the region and state. Packet Page 64 of 124 9 • October 18, 2011 – A proposal to adjust the Strategic Planning and Visioning process schedule was presented to, and considered and supported by, the City Council. City staff is currently working on an adjusted schedule with Beckwith Consulting group and will be bringing this back for City Council for review and consideration. City staff is also working with BCG on surveys and related questions. City administration and BCG anticipate rescheduling the next City Council, Planning Board and Economic Development Commission retreat in early 2012. • October 19, 2011 – The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. The Strategic Planning and Visioning; Technology; Land Use; and Tourism sub groups all presented updates. Additional topics of discussion included possible future initiatives, e.g., Highway 99 Transit Oriented Development nodes around Community Transit SWIFT bus stations, and Downtown/Waterfront activity area, and the adjusted Strategic Planning and Visioning process. Goal 1, Policy 1f of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: ”Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – I continue attending monthly Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee meetings, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA) meetings, and Downtown Business Improvement District meetings in order to share information about City issues and hear about Chamber and DEMA issues/concerns. II. BUSINESS EXPANSION, RETENTION, AND DIVERSIFICATION OF TAX BASE Goal 1, Policy 1c of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Encourage and expand business expansion and retention programs. Goal 3 calls for diversifying the tax base and increasing revenues to support local services.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – I continue working with property and business owners in attempts to help find leasable space and relocate existing businesses, in addition to discussing potential leasing and redevelopment of buildings and land. Efforts have included finding property for relocating a Kruger Clinic and working with Swedish Edmonds to facilitate development. Goal 2, Policy 2i of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Create synergy for commercial businesses where possible, for example, by implementing a “retail core” area in the downtown.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 Packet Page 65 of 124 10 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – The Planning Board discussed potential amendments to the downtown BD zones during meetings on March 9, March 23, April 13, April 27, and June 8, 2011. During the June 8, 2011 Planning Board meeting, the Board voted 7-0 (with amendments) to forward a recommendation to approve the proposed amendments to the City Council. For additional information, see the Planning Board agenda webpage which contains a staff memorandum (see attached), draft code language, and June 8, 2011 Planning Board minutes. • August 23, 2011 – The Edmonds City Council voted unanimously to support the Planning Board’s recommendation to change the 30-foot commercial depth requirements in BD1, and 60-foot commercial depth requirements in BD2- BD5, to 45 feet. This includes amending the commercial frontage improvement map. • See comments in Section III below about a proposed Downtown Business Improvement District. III. IMPROVING BUSINESS CLIMATE Goal 2, Policy 2e of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “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. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – Representatives from the City of Edmonds and Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA) continued to meet and discuss the possible establishment a Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement District (BID). • October 26, 2011 – The Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement District Committee conducted a meeting in the Library Plaza for all business owners with businesses located within the proposed BID boundary. The meeting included a presentation by BID committee members and was followed by a question and answer session. Goal 2, Policy 2h of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “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.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – Highway 99 Enhancement Project: includes adding street lighting fixtures and artwork along the portion of Highway 99 passing through the International District. Modification of project – The project, which is funded by the federal highway enhancements program, was scheduled to go out for bids in late 2010. The City had originally applied for funding earlier in 2010 to add lighting elements to the original Packet Page 66 of 124 11 project area between approximately 224th and 238th. In late 2010, the City was informed that a grant of $289,000 would be added to the original funding of $373,000 to provide for additional light poles. For efficiency purposes, a decision has been made to delay construction until the project could be completed all at one time. The budget now totals $662,000 in federal funding. City staff anticipate advertising the project in late spring 2012 with a completion date of approximately mid 2012. The main project components include the following: • Replace 6 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached artist made pedestrian level light lanterns and banner signage – east side. • Replace 7 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached standard pedestrian level lights and banner signage – east side both north and south of original 6. • Add at least 3 new pedestrian level lights on west side near an island at 76th Avenue. • Resurface island at 76th Avenue, add new ADA curb ramps, and install sculptural lantern artwork with solar panel. • Replace service cabinet. The goal is to create a visual gateway and identity for the Edmonds International District while enhancing the pedestrian experience and safety. IV. TECHNOLOGY Goal 3, Policy 3b of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to pursue new revenue streams.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – The Economic Development and Community Services staff continue to meet monthly with the City’s Community Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) regarding existing technology assets, e.g., fiber and communications equipment. • October, 2011 – The City of Edmonds initiated a soft launch of the City’s new website EdmondsWA.gov. Judd Boyer Designs was the contractor who helped develop the overall framework and City Staff from all departments worked for several months to transfer information from the old website to the new website. They also reviewed existing web pages, deleted outdated information and redundant pages, adding created new web pages that should be quite helpful to all who visit the new website. City staff have been reviewing the new web-ages to identify items which need to be further deleted/revised/reformatted, etc., prior to conducting a formal launch near the end of October which includes issuing a press release. A special acknowledgement needs to go to Carl Nelson for his leadership during the development of the new website. • October 11, 2011 – As requested by the City Council, Carl Nelson, Chief Information Officer for the City of Edmonds prepared a quarterly update for the City Community to the City Council Finance Committee. Packet Page 67 of 124 12 V. TOURISM Goal 3, Policy 3g of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Expand tourism efforts to take advantage of regional trends, such as nature tourism.” Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – The Economic Development Commission Tourism Subgroup has been meeting to discuss tourism development. • June 9 and July 14, 2011 – Frances Chapin, Cindi Cruz and I attended a Washington Tourism Alliance (WTA) meeting to hear about progress towards taking over tourism promotion responsibilities from the Washington State Office of Tourism which ceased to exist effective July 1, 2011. Items of Interest  Energy Efficiency / Sustainability Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – The City launched a new website called EdmondsEnergy.org in July of this year. Since that time, the web pages have been incorporated into the City’s new website. The web pages are dedicated to the subject of energy within the Edmonds community, e.g., how is energy used in Edmonds? What can we do to conserve and reduce energy use... and reduce what we pay on a daily basis? EdmondsEnergy.org is the place to find information on: the City’s energy meter program, energy planning in Edmonds, energy saving ideas, community solar project, hybrid and electric vehicles, bring your own bag campaign, and how to calculate your energy use.  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) - In March of 2009, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced plans to invest $3.2 billion in energy efficiency and conservation projects in U.S. cities, counties, states, territories, and Native American tribes. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program, funded by President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, will provide formula grants for projects that reduce total energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency nationwide. The City of Edmonds received notification that it is eligible for a $160,200 block grant under the EECBG program. The City has until June 25, 2009 to submit an application, i.e., "claim" the grant amount, and 18 months to obligate and three years to expend the funds. This is an entitlement grant for cities over 35,000 in population, rather than a competitive grant. On September 22, 2009, the City was notified that the Department of Energy has awarded an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant to the City of Edmonds. The award is the full amount referenced in the March 2009 eligibility announcement ($160,200). The funds will be Packet Page 68 of 124 13 used for the following six different projects. Announcement of the EECBG opportunity was shared with, and the attached proposed project list was also reviewed by, the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee. Project 1 - PC Energy Management (federal funds) Project 2 - Network Server Energy Upgrades – (federal funds) Project 3 - Residential & Commercial Energy Meters (federal and local non-federal funds) Project 4 - Heating System Design and Feasibility Study for Frances Anderson Center (federal funds) Project 5 - Purchase 4 Hybrid and 2 Electric Vehicles – (federal and local non- federal funds) Project 6 - Low-Energy Lighting Retrofit – (federal funds) Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • October, 2011 – All projects listed above have been completed.  Burlington Northern Santa Fe – Installation of Second Rail Line As a part of the Sound Transit’s Sound Move, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) will be installing a second rail line alongside the existing rail line between the areas north of Downtown Edmonds and south of Marina Beach Park. Based on BNSF engineering plans and field stakes, there will be impacts to Admiral Way and Marina Beach Park. As mentioned within 2010 Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Reports, the City secured the services of an engineering firm in order to fully determine the impact and possibly design a new Admiral Way alignment that will maintain access to Marina Beach Park, Port of Edmonds and existing parking areas. Regarding a timeline related to the installation of a BNSF second rail line, BNSF has begun grading south of Dayton Street and the installation and relocation of the existing and second rail lines respectively, could begin sometime 2012 or later. This being said, I have been trying to obtain a definitive date from BNSF as to when installation of the second rail line, with little success. Significant Activities Since July 21, 2011 • July, August, September and October, 2011 – BNSF has been installing culverts beneath the existing rail line and grading for a future second rail line near Marina Beach Park and off leash area. The culverts, financed by Sound Transit, will allow for the eventual daylighting of Willow Creek. Packet Page 69 of 124 14 • October, 2011 – BNSF will be installing improvements to the area where tracks intersect Main Street. Although this requires the City of Edmonds to pay for a portion of the improvements, BNSF has agreed to help fund the improvements.  Federal Grants July, 2011 – The City of Edmonds has been quite successful recently in securing federal grants. The following highlights funding and projects. 1. March 11, 2011 – The City of Edmonds has been quite successful recently in securing federal grants. The following highlights funding and projects. 2. Downtown Edmonds - Preserve America Grant in the amount of $24,000 for a matching grant to implement way-finding/interpretive signage. 3. 228th and HWY 99 - $536,000 for access and safety improvement for the intersection. 4. Main Street - FHWA Enhancements Grant in the amount of $725,000 for Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements (between 5th and 6th Streets). 5. Five Corners – Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grant in the amount of $463,000 for a design of a roundabout and property acquisition, if needed. 6. Highway 99 - FHWA Enhancements Grant in the amount of $289,000 for International District Illumination Enhancements (This is a Phase 2 grant). 7. 76th Ave W/212th – FHWA grant in the amount of $940,397 for design and right of way acquisition to improve the intersection. 8. Shell Valley – Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant in the amount of $100,000 for Shell Valley access Road. 9. Stormwater Improvements - Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant in the amount $78,115 for programmatic stormwater improvements. 10. 84th Avenue - Washington Traffic Safety Commission grant in the amount of $6,250 for installation of radar reader board which depicts what speed a car is going. Federal Grants Total $3,161,762 Packet Page 70 of 124 AM-4312   Item #: 2. E. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Linda Hynd Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Equitable Adjustment from Precision Earthworks, Inc. for $951.924.48. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Equitable Adjustment by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Precision Earthworks, Inc. General Contractor 3816 South Road Mukilteo, WA 98275 ($951,924.48) Attachments Precision Claim for Equitable Adjustment Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 11:24 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 02:09 PM Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 10/27/2011 10:56 AM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 71 of 124 Packet Page 72 of 124 Packet Page 73 of 124 Packet Page 74 of 124 Packet Page 75 of 124 Packet Page 76 of 124 Packet Page 77 of 124 AM-4307   Item #: 2. F. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:Consent   Submitted For:Mike Cooper Submitted By:Mike Heavey Department:Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Information  Information Subject Title Proclamation recognizing Arbor Day. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff For information. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative By establishing our City's Arbor Day, we not only celebrate our greatest natural resource but also take a necessary step to achieve the Edmonds Tree Board's goal of obtaining the Tree City USA designation-a major benchmark in the national arborist community. While it is widely known that the United States National Arbor Day takes place in April, we in Washington choose to celebrate it during the harvest time that is consistent with our optimal planting time. October 1 is the day that we have selected to honor Arbor Day here in Edmonds. Attachments Arbor Day Proclamation Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 10:51 AM Form Started By: Mike Heavey Started On: 10/25/2011 01:43 PM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 78 of 124 Packet Page 79 of 124 AM-4306   Item #: 4. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:15 Minutes   Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Department:Community Services Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Cities of Snohomish County Legislative Agenda - 2011/2012 Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Attached is a proposed updated Cities of Snohomish County Legislative Agenda for review by the Edmonds City.  Cities of Snohomish County are seeking support from the City of Edmonds.     Cities of Snohomish County will soon begin discussing a strategy to seek support for legislative priorities listed in the attached document, not only in partnership with Association of Washington Cities, but also on their own.  John Caulfield, Mountlake Terrace City Manager, will be attending the November 1, 2011 City Council meeting to discuss the legislative agenda and to answer questions from the Edmonds City Council.  Attachments Cities of Snohomish County 2011-2012 State Legislative Agenda  Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/26/2011 04:17 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 11:24 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 02:09 PM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 10/25/2011 01:35 PM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 80 of 124 CITIES OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 2011-2012 State Legislative Agenda This Legislative Agenda, which reflects input from the Cities of Snohomish County, expresses a collective position on key items that are expected to arise in the form of legislation, budget decisions, or policy decisions in the upcoming Session of the Legislature. Aerospace Industry Support the Washington Aerospace Partnership and other stakeholder groups in developing a unified strategy (e.g., training & education, research & development, Office of Aerospace and Defense, unemployment insurance tax, worker‟s compensation, transportation infrastructure) to ensure that Washington State remains the leading location in the world for aerospace. Led by The Boeing Company, the aerospace industry within Snohomish County employs as many as 45,000 people, while one out of every three to six Washington State jobs is supported either directly or indirectly by the aerospace industry. Economic Development Support “tax-increment financing (TIF)”, which is a tool used by most other states to foster economic and community development to allow cities to proactively implement their Comprehensive Plans and to ensure local, regional and national competitiveness. Support additional financial resources for Local Revitalization Financing (LRF) program and Local Infrastructure Finance Tool (LIFT) to allow those cities who currently qualify to participate. Local Transportation and Capital Facilities Support legislation such as a transportation revenue package that ensures local distribution and local funding options to provide cities sustainable and adequate funding for vital infrastructure investments that is capable of promoting economic growth and prosperity to the cities of Snohomish County. Fully fund Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) and Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) programs to provide cities funding for infrastructure and economic development purposes; no additional diversion or „sweeping‟ of capital accounts such as the Public Works Trust Fund. Support investment in key transportation corridors such as U.S. 2, SR-9, and I-5, which are critical to the quality of life and the movement of people and goods throughout Snohomish County. Growth Management Act Reform of annexation statutes and those dealing with the role of cities, counties and special purpose districts in urban areas to include: require joint planning in unincorporated urban growth areas; removing referendum from annexation process; limiting the authority of boundary review boards; and legislation that allows counties the ability to levy a utility tax, if it is restricted to unincorporated areas and there are accommodations for the needs of cities, in those areas, such as annexation financing assistance. Unfunded Mandates and Preemption of Local Authority Strongly oppose any legislation that: imposes an “unfunded mandate” without additional funding to support these programs; attempts to erode local revenue or tax authority such as local state-shared revenues that are critical to the financial health of cities; and pre-empts local authority over any policy or operational matter traditionally and historically vested with local government. Packet Page 81 of 124 CITIES OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 2011-2012 State Legislative Agenda City of Arlington Kristin Banfield Assistant City Administrator 360-403-3441 City of Brier Bob Colinas, Mayor 425-775-5440 Bob Stowe, City Manager 425-486-3256 City of Edmonds Mike Cooper, Mayor 425-771-0247 City of Everett Pat McClain, Executive Director 425-257-7104 Doug Levy, Outcomes by Levy 425-922-3999 City of Granite Falls Brent Kirk, Public Works Supervisor 360-691-6441 City of Lake Stevens Jan Berg, City Administrator 425-377-3230 City of Lynnwood Don Gough, Mayor 425-670-5003 City of Marysville Gloria Hirashima Chief Administrative Officer 360-363-8088 City of Mill Creek Tim Burns, City Manager 425-921-5724 City of Monroe Gene Brazel, City Administrator 360-794-7400 City of Mountlake Terrace John Caulfield, City Manager 425-744-6205 City of Mukilteo Joe Marine, Mayor 425-263-8018 City of Snohomish Larry Bauman, City Manager 360-568-3115 City of Sultan Deborah Knight, City Administrator 360-793-1164 Town of Woodway Eric Faison, Town Administrator 206-542-0183 Packet Page 82 of 124 AM-4316   Item #: 5. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:15 Minutes   Submitted By:Sandy Chase Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information  Information Subject Title Annual Report from the Public Defender. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff N/A Previous Council Action N/A Narrative James Feldman, Feldman & Lee, serves as the Public Defender for the City of Edmonds.  An annual report will be provided at the meeting. Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 03:00 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 04:28 PM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 10/27/2011 02:12 PM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 83 of 124 AM-4313   Item #: 6. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:15 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Public hearing on revenue sources and 2012 property tax levy rate. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve Previous Council Action None Narrative The following Ordinance authorizes a 1% increase in the 2012 levy for regular property tax and the Emergency Medical Services levy. The Ordinance also continues the Debt Service levy. The Levy Certification must be received by the Snohomish County Assessor by November 30, 2011. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2012 Revenue:$13,795,028 Expenditure: Fiscal Impact: Regular levy $9,636,195 EMS levy $3,263,193 Excess (voted) levy $895,640 Attachments 2012 Property Tax Ordinance 2012 Property Tax Levy Detail City Tax Rates 2009-2012 2012 GF Revenue Detail Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 03:54 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/28/2011 10:07 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 10:20 AM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/27/2011 01:11 PM Final Approval Date: 10/28/2011  Packet Page 84 of 124 Packet Page 85 of 124 2012 Property Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $9,636,195, AN EMS LEVY OF $3.263.193 AND LEVYING $895.640 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds have properly given notice of the public hearing held on November 1, 2011, to consider the City's current expense budget for 2012, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and WHEREAS, the City Council in the course of considering the budget for 2012 have reviewed all sources of revenue and examined all anticipated expenses and obligations; and WHEREAS, the district’s actual levy amount for the previous year was $9,499,558 for regular property levy, and $3,216,629 for EMS levy, and $877,984 for debt service payments, and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines following public hearing that it is in the best interest of and necessary to meet the expenses and obligations of the City to increase the regular property levy by 1%; and keep the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) levy at the prior year level, and WHEREAS, the population of this district is greater than 10,000, and WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office has requested that all Snohomish County Taxing Districts submit their levy certifications to the county on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100; NOW, THEREFORE Packet Page 86 of 124 2012 Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 5 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The limit factor for the regular levy to be collected in budget year 2012 shall be limited to the 101%, or 100% plus inflation, which ever is lower of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied in the City in any year since 1985. Section 2. Regular Property Tax. The 2011 regular property tax levy for collection in 2012 is the amount levied in 2010 for collection in 2011, plus an increase of $94,996 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $9,636,195. Section 3. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) property tax levy. The 2011 EMS property tax levy for collection in 2012 is the amount levied in 2010 for collection in 2011, plus an increase of $32,166 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $3,263,193. Section 4. There shall be and is hereby levied current taxes of $895,640, the purpose of which is to make debt service payments on voter approved bonds. Section 5. The levies contained in sections 2 through 4 are subject to amendment upon receipt of 2011 assessed valuation from Snohomish County. Section 6. Pursuant to the request by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office, the Finance Director is hereby authorized to submit to the Snohomish County Council Packet Page 87 of 124 2012 Property Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 5 certification of the hereby approved levies on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100 attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. It is enacted on a vote of a majority plus one of the City Council. APPROVED: MAYOR, MIKE COOPER ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: _________ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: _________ PUBLISHED: _________ EFFECTIVE DATE: _________ ORDINANCE NO. ____ Packet Page 88 of 124 2012 Property Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 5 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. ____ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the __ day of November, 2011, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. ____. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $9,636,195, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,263,193 AND LEVYING $895,640 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this __ day of November, 2011. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 89 of 124 S t 2012 Prope Submit this d the year in w In accord Edmonds said distr district’s Regular L Excess L EMS Lev ________ Signature erty Tax Ordin document to which the levy dance with s, do hereby rict requests budget, whi Levy: $9,63 Levy: $3,26 vy: $895, __________ e nance E Le the county y amounts ar RCW 84.5 y certify to t s that the fo ich was adop 36,195 63,193 ,640 ___________ Exhibit A – L evy Certi legislative au re to be collec 2.020, I, Sh the Snohom ollowing lev pted followin __________ Levy Certifi ification uthority on o cted and forw hawn Hunst mish County vy amounts b ng a public h ________ Date ication or before No ward a copy tock, Financ legislative a be collected hearing on N ovember 30 o to the assess ce Director, authority tha d in 2012 as November 1, Page 5 of 5 of the year p sor. for the Ci at the Counc s provided i , 2011. preceding ity of cil of in the Packet Page 90 of 124 Ci t y  of  Ed m o n d s 20 1 2  Le v y  Ca l c u l a t i o n Re g u l a r  Pr o p e r t y  Ta x Re v e n u e Am o u n t  le v i e d  la s t  ye a r 9, 4 9 9 , 5 5 8 $               Pe r c e n t a g e  in c r e a s e 1% 9 4 , 9 9 6                              Es t i m a t e  fo r  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n 30 , 0 5 9                              Re f u n d e d  am o u n t  to  be  ad d e d 11 , 5 8 2                              As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  * T o t a l  Le v y E M S  Le v y B o n d s C o m b i n e d  Levy 20 1 2  Re g u l a r  pr o p e r t y  ta x  le v y 9, 6 3 6 , 1 9 5 $               5, 7 8 9 , 2 8 9 , 2 3 2 $   1. 6 6 4 4 8 6 6 $         0. 5 0 $                      0. 1 5 4 7 0 6 4 $  2.3191930 $  EM S  Le v y Am o u n t  le v i e d  la s t  ye a r 3, 2 1 6 , 6 2 9 $               Pe r c e n t a g e  in c r e a s e 1% 3 2 , 1 6 6                              Es t i m a t e  fo r  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n 10 , 1 7 8                              Re f u n d e d  am o u n t  to  be  ad d e d 4, 2 2 0                                  As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  * 20 1 2  Re g u l a r  pr o p e r t y  ta x  le v y 3, 2 6 3 , 1 9 3 $               5, 7 8 9 , 2 8 9 , 2 3 2 $   0. 5 6 3 6 6 0 4 $         Ma x .  EM S  le v y 2, 8 9 4 , 6 4 5                  5, 7 8 9 , 2 8 9 , 2 3 2 $   0. 5 0                                      St a t u t o r y  li m i t  of  $0 . 5 0 In c r e a s e  to  ex c e s s  (b a n k e d )  EM S  le v y  ca p a c i t y 36 8 , 5 4 9 $                     0. 0 6 3 6 6 0 4 $         Vo t e d  Bo n d  Le v y  ‐   20 0 3  UT G O  Re f u n d i n g  Bo n d s  ** Re g u l a r  pr o p e r t y  ta x  le v y 89 5 , 6 4 0 $                     5, 7 8 9 , 2 8 9 , 2 3 2 $   * 0 . 1 5 4 7 0 6 4 $         Pr i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t To t a l  D/ S O/ S  Ba l a n c e 20 1 2 75 5 , 0 0 0 $                                     14 0 , 6 4 0 $                     89 5 , 6 4 0 $                         3, 5 2 0 , 0 0 0 $           20 1 3 80 0 , 0 0 0                                            11 6 , 1 0 3                        91 6 , 1 0 3                              2, 7 2 0 , 0 0 0              20 1 4 85 5 , 0 0 0                                            91 , 3 0 3                              94 6 , 3 0 3                              1, 8 6 5 , 0 0 0              20 1 5 90 5 , 0 0 0                                            64 , 3 7 0                              96 9 , 3 7 0                              96 0 , 0 0 0                        20 1 6 96 0 , 0 0 0                                            33 , 6 0 0                              99 3 , 6 0 0                              ‐                                           * E s t i m a t e d  As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  as  of  10 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 1 .  Fi n a l  va l u a t i o n  wi l l  no t  be  kn o w n  un t i l  mi d ‐No v e m b e r . ** C i t y ' s  in v e s t m e n t  ad v i s o r  re v i e w e d  de b t  re p a y m e n t  te r m s  in  Oc t o b e r  20 1 1  an d  de t e r m i n e d  th e r e  wo u l d  be  no ne t  sa v i n g s  on  re f i n a n c i n g  th e s e  bo n d s  (a n y  sa v i n g s  wo u l d  be  le s s  th a n  bo n d  is s u a n c e  co s t s ) . 20 0 3  UT G O  Re f u n d i n g  Bo n d s  De b t  Sc h e d u l e Pa c k e t Pa g e 91 of 12 4 Ci t y  of  Ed m o n d s Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  Su m m a r y 20 0 9 ‐20 1 2 (p r o j e c t e d ) % Change %  Change 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 20 1 1 ‐2012 2 0 0 9 ‐2012 As s e s s e d  Va l u e 7, 7 0 9 , 2 0 9 , 4 9 0 $           6, 9 5 5 , 4 8 2 , 7 1 7 $         6, 4 3 3 , 2 5 8 , 8 5 3 $         5, 7 8 9 , 2 8 9 , 2 3 2 $         ‐10.01%‐24.90% Ci t y  Re g u l a r 1. 1 9 9 9 0 2 $                           1. 3 4 9 0 0 8 $                           1. 4 7 6 6 3 2 $                           1. 6 6 4 4 8 7 $                           12.72% 3 8 . 7 2 % Ci t y  EM S 0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                              0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                              0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                0.00%0.00% Ci t y  Bo n d s 0. 1 1 5 6 5 0                                0. 1 3 0 7 5 0                              0. 1 4 5 7 2 1                              0. 1 5 4 7 0 6                                6.17% 3 3 . 7 7 % Su b t o t a l  (C i t y  As s e s s e d  Ta x ) 1. 8 1 5 5 5 2 $                           1. 9 7 9 7 5 8 $                           2. 1 2 2 3 5 4 $                           2. 3 1 9 1 9 3 $                           9.27% 2 7 . 7 4 % Ci t y  Re g u l a r 9, 2 5 0 , 2 9 9 $                         9, 3 8 3 , 0 0 0 $                         9, 4 7 6 , 0 1 5 $                         9, 6 3 6 , 1 9 5 $                         1.69%4.17% Ci t y  EM S 3, 8 5 4 , 6 0 5                              3, 4 7 7 , 7 4 1                            3, 8 5 4 , 6 0 5                            3, 2 6 3 , 1 9 3                              ‐15.34%‐15.34% Ci t y  Bo n d s 83 9 , 0 8 4                                      85 3 , 0 8 4                                    87 7 , 9 8 4                                    89 5 , 6 4 0                                      2.01% 6 . 7 4 % Su b t o t a l  (C i t y  As s e s s e d  Ta x ) 13 , 9 4 3 , 9 8 8 $                       13 , 7 1 3 , 8 2 5 $                     14 , 2 0 8 , 6 0 4 $                     13 , 7 9 5 , 0 2 8 $                     ‐2.91%‐1.07% Re g u l a r  Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  ‐   In c r e a s e  li m i t e d  to  1%  an n u a l l y ,  pl u s  th e  va l u e  of  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n / t e n a n t  im p r o v e m e n t s . EM S  ‐   Th e  20 1 2  EM S  le v y  re f l e c t s  a  1%  in c r e a s e .  Ho w e v e r ,  du e  to  th e  $0 . 5 0  pe r  $1 , 0 0 0  li m i t a t i o n ,  we  an t i c i p a t e  co l l e c t i n g  ap p r o x i m a t e l y  $2.9M  in  2012. Vo t e d  Bo n d  Le v y  ‐   Th i s  le v y  is  ne c e s s a r y  to  ad d r e s s  th e  bo n d  pa y m e n t  sc h e d u l e  fo r  th e  pu b l i c  sa f e t y  bo n d s . Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  Ra t e s (p e r  $1 , 0 0 0  as s e s s e d  va l u e ) Pr o p e r t y  Ta x e s To t a l  Re c e i p t s Pa c k e t Pa g e 92 of 12 4 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e D e t a i l Ac c o u n t N u m b e r Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e s 20 0 7 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 8 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 9 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 1 E s t i m a t e 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t $$ Change 12-11 % Change 12-11 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R e a l P e r s o n a l / P r o p e r t y T a x 8, 8 2 8 , 2 1 0 $ 9, 0 0 0 , 9 1 2 $ 9, 1 8 9 , 0 8 7 $ 9, 3 2 4 , 6 2 5 $ 9, 5 0 1 , 1 1 8 $ 9, 6 2 9 , 9 8 6 $ $ 128,868 1.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 E m s P r o p e r t y T a x 2, 3 8 5 , 9 9 7 2, 4 3 1 , 8 0 3 3, 8 0 8 , 7 2 8 3, 4 6 4 , 9 5 6 3, 2 1 6 , 6 2 9 2, 9 0 8 , 9 4 4 (307,685) - 9 . 6 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 V o t e d P r o p e r t y T a x 78 3 , 4 3 0 81 0 , 7 0 0 83 1 , 0 8 6 84 7 , 7 1 3 87 7 , 9 8 4 89 5 , 6 4 0 17,656 2.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L o c a l R e t a i l S a l e s / U s e T a x 5, 4 5 5 , 1 2 2 4, 0 7 7 , 4 1 4 4, 4 1 4 , 8 7 4 4, 4 4 6 , 1 1 2 4, 6 0 8 , 9 5 9 4, 7 2 4 , 1 8 3 115,224 2.5% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 3 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N a t u r a l G a s U s e T a x 16 , 1 1 0 16 , 9 6 5 16 , 3 4 0 12 , 9 6 3 12 , 9 8 4 13,244 260 2.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 3 . 7 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 / 1 0 S a l e s T a x L o c a l C r i m J u s t 66 1 , 9 6 3 49 8 , 1 1 5 52 7 , 3 9 1 52 9 , 9 3 8 50 9 , 8 0 0 51 4 , 8 9 8 5,098 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G a s U t i l i t y T a x 89 6 , 8 1 7 75 2 , 4 9 7 93 7 , 6 3 0 75 2 , 9 9 5 86 6 , 3 8 9 89 2 , 3 8 1 25,992 3.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T . V . C a b l e F r a n c h i s e F e e 55 , 6 7 8 10 4 , 8 4 1 62 8 , 2 2 8 57 7 , 2 3 7 72 8 , 8 1 7 75 0 , 6 8 2 21,865 3.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T e l e p ho n e U t i l i t y T a x 1, 2 8 5 , 0 0 0 1, 3 4 3 , 6 5 1 1, 4 5 6 , 0 2 0 1, 4 8 4 , 9 3 9 1, 3 7 6 , 4 7 7 1, 3 9 0 , 2 4 2 13,765 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E l e c t r i c U t i l i t y T a x 1, 4 0 0 , 4 8 6 1, 2 8 9 , 1 7 8 1, 4 6 5 , 3 6 9 1, 4 5 4 , 4 3 5 1, 4 5 9 , 2 8 7 1, 4 7 3 , 8 8 0 14,593 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 5 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S o l i d W a s t e U t i l i t y T a x 25 1 , 3 7 0 24 3 , 2 7 9 27 4 , 8 1 5 26 2 , 0 9 1 29 1 , 6 8 4 29 4 , 6 0 1 2,917 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 W a t e r U t i l i t y T a x 21 7 , 6 5 6 22 6 , 6 4 6 51 8 , 7 7 8 71 3 , 7 4 8 76 7 , 3 8 1 82 4 , 9 3 5 5 7,554 7.5% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S e w e r U t i l i t y T a x 27 0 , 2 5 4 28 0 , 9 9 7 46 9 , 8 3 5 46 5 , 2 1 5 47 0 , 0 0 0 47 0 , 0 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S t o r m w a t e r U t i l i t y T a x 11 3 , 2 2 2 11 7 , 0 9 4 20 2 , 3 5 2 21 7 , 6 7 0 23 5 , 2 4 2 25 4 , 0 6 1 18,819 8.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 7 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L e a s e h o l d E x c i s e T a x 24 2 , 6 1 3 23 9 , 6 7 7 24 1 , 1 9 4 24 9 , 3 8 4 21 6 , 8 2 5 22 1 , 1 6 2 4,337 2.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 7 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P u l l t a b s T a x 41 , 1 0 2 74 , 9 6 0 60 , 4 3 9 53 , 7 3 0 59 , 6 6 1 60,257 596 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 1 7 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A m u s e m e n t G a m e s 36 6 - - - - - To t a l T a x e s 22 , 9 0 5 , 3 9 5 2 1 , 5 0 8 , 7 3 0 2 5 , 0 4 2 , 1 6 7 2 4 , 8 5 7 , 7 5 1 2 5 , 1 9 9 , 2 3 8 2 5 , 3 1 9 , 0 9 6 1 1 9 , 8 5 8 0.5% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e P e r m i t s - S p e c i a l U s e 4 , 5 9 0 8 , 1 3 5 5 , 8 3 0 9 0 5 6 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 (1,000) - 1 6 . 7 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P r o f A n d O c c L i c e n s e - T a x i 6 6 0 6 6 0 3 6 0 6 9 0 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A m u s e m e n t s 1 0 , 6 5 0 2 , 4 3 8 6 , 5 7 5 1 3 , 0 5 0 6 , 0 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B u s . L i c e n c e P e r m i t P e n a l t y 2 , 4 4 3 2 , 4 7 3 4 , 1 8 0 4 , 9 1 8 5 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G e n e r a l B u s i n e s s L i c e n s e 5 9 , 3 8 6 6 0 , 3 7 0 1 0 7 , 9 5 1 1 0 2 , 6 6 2 1 0 4 , 2 0 3 1 0 5 , 2 4 5 1,042 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F r a n c h i s e A g r e e m e n t s 5 4 6 , 7 3 3 4 5 0 , 1 6 8 5 8 1 , 1 5 3 6 3 2 , 5 1 3 5 7 6 , 4 7 9 5 8 8 , 0 0 8 11,529 2.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F r a n c h i s e A g r e e m e n t s - V e r i z o n - 9 5 1 3 8 , 7 1 8 9 4 , 0 8 6 1 0 5 , 8 7 2 1 0 6 , 9 3 0 1,058 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F r a n c h i s e A g r e e m e n t s - B l a c k r o c k - - - 1 , 6 9 4 6 , 8 3 3 6 , 9 0 1 68 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 5 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O l y m p i c V i e w W a t e r D i s t r i c t F r a n c h i s e 1 2 9 , 6 6 4 1 2 6 , 9 4 1 1 8 5 , 2 1 5 2 2 9 , 9 0 2 2 1 0 , 1 9 0 2 1 2 , 2 9 2 2,102 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D e v S e r v P e r m i t S u r c h a r g e 2 3 , 0 2 5 2 0 , 7 6 0 2 0 , 0 1 0 2 0 , 8 0 5 2 0 , 0 0 0 2 1 , 0 0 0 1,000 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N o n - R e s i d e n t B u s L i c e n s e 2 4 , 5 5 0 3 9 , 3 5 0 5 3 , 4 0 0 6 3 , 4 5 0 3 8 , 5 0 0 3 8 , 8 8 5 385 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R i g h t O f W a y F r a n c h i s e F e e 5 , 0 0 0 - - 6 , 5 3 1 14 , 0 0 0 10,000 (4,000) - 2 8 . 6 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 2 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B u i l d i n g S t r u c t u r e P e r m i t s 76 4 , 0 7 3 59 6 , 2 6 1 38 5 , 2 7 2 36 1 , 9 2 8 40 0 , 0 0 0 42 0 , 0 0 0 20,000 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A n i m a l L i c e n s e s 11 , 1 0 4 11 , 6 2 2 12 , 9 3 2 15 , 1 8 5 11 , 0 0 0 11,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S t r e e t A n d C u r b P e r m i t 12 , 6 3 0 43 , 8 8 0 63 , 3 4 0 53 , 1 8 5 42 , 0 0 0 42,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 2 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t r N o n - B u s L i c / P e r m i t s 6, 3 5 2 5, 8 8 5 6, 6 9 4 5, 7 1 5 7, 0 0 0 7,000 - 0.0% To t a l L i c e n s e s & P e r m i t s 1, 6 0 0 , 8 5 9 1 , 3 6 9 , 8 9 2 1 , 4 7 1 , 6 2 9 1 , 6 0 7 , 2 1 8 1 , 5 5 4 , 0 7 6 1 , 5 8 6 , 2 6 1 3 2 , 1 8 5 2.1% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 1 4 . 0 2 5 . 1 0 H U D E D I G r a n t - - 5 5 , 5 5 4 9 1 , 4 4 6 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 1 6 . 6 0 1 . 0 0 D o j 1 5 - 0 4 0 4 - 0 - 1 - 7 5 4 - 2 0 0 6 B p v 7 , 4 2 5 3 7 9 5 , 0 5 3 4 , 3 8 9 4 , 4 1 0 3 , 9 6 9 (441) - 1 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 8 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 E E C B G G r a n t - - - 7 9 , 2 0 3 7 3 , 5 8 8 - (73,588) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 1 . 1 6 0 . 5 8 0 . 0 0 2 0 0 9 R e c o v e r y A c t E d w a r d B y r n e - - 1 4 , 5 5 6 2 4 , 6 1 9 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 1 6 . 7 3 8 . 0 0 J u s t i c e A s s i s t a n c e G r a n t - 9 , 9 9 9 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 1 5 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 D a h p G r a n t F y 0 7 3 , 0 0 0 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 W a A s s o c O f S h e r i f f s T r a f f i c G r a n t - - - - 1 , 7 0 0 - (1,700) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 1 W T S C S l o w D o w n o r P a y U p - - - 5 , 0 0 6 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 5 W t s c S p e e d i n g E m p h a s i s S a 2 4 4 8 5 , 4 1 8 - 2 , 0 4 1 - - - Page 1 of 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 93 of 12 4 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e D e t a i l Ac c o u n t N u m b e r Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e s 20 0 7 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 8 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 9 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 1 E s t i m a t e 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t $$ Change 12-11 % Change 12-11 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 1 . 0 1 W T S C X - 5 2 D U I a n d S p e e d i n g - 4 , 3 5 5 3, 0 4 1 7, 4 3 1 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 2 . 0 0 W t s c - D u i T r a f f i c S a f e t y 5, 0 8 4 3, 0 5 9 2, 0 7 9 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 3 . 0 0 W t s c - H i g h w a y S a f e t y 14 , 8 9 7 - 2 , 0 0 0 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 4 . 0 0 W t s c - N i g h t T i m e S e a t B e l t E n f o r c e m e n t 7, 8 7 3 - 1 0 , 9 5 9 1, 3 9 2 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 5 . 0 0 T a r g e t Z e r o T e a m s G r a n t - - - 2 , 1 2 5 10 , 0 0 0 10,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 6 . 0 0 H i g h V i s i b i l i t y E n f o r c e m e n t - - - - 6, 0 0 0 6,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 9 7 . 0 0 3 . 0 0 S h s g p # E 0 5 - 0 7 1 F i r e R e s c u e B o a t 20 9 , 0 0 0 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 9 7 . 0 3 6 . 0 1 E 0 7 9 4 3 P # 1 7 P w # 2 4 2 2 0 0 6 S t o r m A s s i s t a n c e 8 , 0 3 2 32 2 - 10 0 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 9 7 . 0 3 9 . 0 1 H a z a r d M it i g a t i o n G r a n t F e ma # E 0 6 - 2 1 8 60 , 4 7 9 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 W S P - D r u g R e c og n i t i o n E x p e r t O t 35 0 - 1 , 1 2 1 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 1 2 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 W A S T A d m i n O f f i c e C o u r t s I n t e r p r e t e r F e e - 6 5 6 2, 6 4 7 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 1 0 1 . 0 0 D o e - S h o r e l i n e M a s t e r P r o g G 0 6 0 0 1 0 8 48 , 0 2 3 4, 9 8 3 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 W a S t a t e T r a f f i c C o m m G r a n t 4, 0 2 5 9, 6 0 6 4, 0 3 2 1, 9 6 9 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 2 W S D O T S h e l l V a l l e y L A 7 2 2 3 - - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E M S F i r e D e p a r t m e n t G r a n t - 2 1 2 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 4 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 W a S t a t e D e p t O f H e a l t h G r a n t 1, 4 3 9 1, 6 4 4 1, 7 2 6 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 6 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 1 W A S P C A u t o T h e f t G r a n t - - 2 8 , 6 1 7 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 6 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 S m a r t C o m m u t e r P r o j e c t G r a n t - - - 44 0 60 0 - (600) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 9 7 . 0 3 6 . 0 1 E 0 7 9 4 3 P # 1 7 P w # 2 3 9 & 2 4 1 2 0 0 6 S t m A s s i s t 1 , 3 4 0 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 5 . 0 0 0 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 P u d P r i v i l e d g e T a x 17 1 , 0 5 7 17 9 , 2 3 5 18 0 , 8 3 3 18 6 , 2 5 7 18 1 , 5 3 3 18 3 , 3 4 8 1,815 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 1 0 . 2 9 0 . 0 0 J u d i c i a l S a l a r y C o n t r i b u t i o n - S t a t e 10 , 7 6 8 13 , 3 9 2 9, 7 1 7 15 , 8 7 5 12 , 0 0 0 13,000 1,000 8.3% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 2 1 0 . 0 0 M v e t / S p e c i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n 7, 9 6 8 6, 3 3 4 8, 7 9 1 9, 1 0 1 9, 1 0 0 9,100 (0) 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 2 6 0 . 0 0 C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e - S p e c i a l P r o g r a m s 31 , 1 0 0 24 , 3 7 8 33 , 5 6 1 34 , 4 7 5 33 , 8 2 7 33,827 0 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 5 1 0 . 00 D u i - C i t i e s 9, 3 2 1 5, 4 8 4 13 , 3 3 3 7, 5 8 2 9, 0 0 0 9,500 500 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 9 4 0 . 0 0 L i q u o r E x c i s e T a x 18 3 , 8 7 6 14 8 , 5 8 4 19 9 , 1 8 2 20 2 , 6 6 5 20 0 , 6 6 6 20 0 , 6 6 6 (0 ) 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 9 5 0 . 0 0 L i q u o r B o a r d P r o f i t s 29 5 , 2 4 4 27 4 , 1 3 4 28 0 , 4 7 0 32 7 , 1 6 3 31 0 , 8 3 5 31 0 , 8 3 5 0 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S h a r e d C o u r t C o s t s 6, 1 0 0 10 , 6 7 8 3, 0 4 8 52 4 6, 0 0 0 6,300 300 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M u n i c p a l C o u r t A g r e e m e n t w / L y n n w o o d - - - 18 8 1, 0 0 0 1,050 50 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 9 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e D i s t r i c t # 1 S t a t i o n B i l l i n g s - - 8 1 , 8 3 3 55,080 (26,753) - 3 2 . 7 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e F B I C o n t r a c t s 13 , 3 8 9 12 , 4 4 2 12 , 0 0 0 - (6 1 6 ) - 616 -100.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 D v C o o r d i n a t o r S e r v i c e s 4, 0 3 7 8, 2 9 6 9, 4 7 3 9, 6 8 2 10 , 1 4 6 10,760 614 6.1% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 2 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e P r o t e c t i o n - W o o d w a y 31 8 , 4 3 8 33 7 , 5 4 4 36 0 , 4 9 7 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 2 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e P r o t e c t i o n - D i s t r i c t # 1 22 1 , 7 6 3 29 5 , 0 7 4 73 0 , 5 2 3 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C a m p u s S a f e t y - E d m . S c h . D i s t . 42 , 4 9 6 79 , 7 2 0 54 , 5 3 8 33 , 2 2 5 10 , 0 0 0 11,500 1,500 15.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 W o o d w a y - L a w P r o t e c t i o n 7, 6 7 6 10 , 6 2 5 8, 2 0 4 10 , 4 4 7 10 , 0 0 0 10,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C i t y O f M t l k T e r r - A n i m a l C o n t r 30 , 7 4 8 31 , 8 2 4 22 , 4 4 7 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S n o c o m / D i r e c t o r S e r v i c e s 13 2 , 4 3 8 15 4 , 3 0 2 96 , 7 7 4 61 , 1 5 1 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 7 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r go v ' t R e v e n u e - S S C C F H - - - - - 6 9 , 3 0 0 69,300 NA 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 3 8 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S n o - I s l e 59 , 3 0 7 62 , 3 2 1 51 , 2 3 9 67 , 7 3 6 68 , 7 3 0 69,418 688 1.0% To t a l I n t e r g o v ' t R e v e n u e 1, 9 2 2 , 1 1 2 1 , 6 8 9 , 5 8 1 2 , 2 0 8 , 0 5 6 1 , 1 8 4 , 1 9 0 1 , 0 4 0 , 3 5 2 1 , 0 1 3 , 6 5 3 ( 2 6 , 6 9 9 ) -2.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R e c o r d / L e g a l I n s t r u m t s 2 , 0 5 4 1 , 8 8 6 1 , 4 8 9 6 4 6 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 50 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C o u r t R e c o r d S e r v i c e s 9 3 5 8 2 3 3 - 1 0 0 1 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 D / M C o u r t R e c S e r 7 - - 1 0 4 9 0 0 9 5 0 50 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 C i v i l F e e - 2 7 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C o u r t - O t h e r C e r t / C c F e e 3 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S a l e M a p s & B o o k s 3 , 1 1 6 5 0 0 2 6 2 1 6 6 7 8 - (78) - 1 0 0 . 0 % Page 2 of 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 94 of 12 4 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e D e t a i l Ac c o u n t N u m b e r Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e s 20 0 7 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 8 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 9 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 1 E s t i m a t e 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t $$ Change 12-11 % Change 12-11 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M u n i c . - D i s t . C o u r t C u r r E x p e n 23 3 51 8 27 7 21 1 15 0 150 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P h o t o c o p i e s 6, 0 5 8 4, 8 6 5 3, 2 8 3 4, 2 7 1 4, 0 0 0 4,000 (0) 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e D i s c l o s u r e R e q u e s t s 7, 0 0 5 4, 9 1 9 4, 2 3 1 5, 3 7 6 5, 0 0 0 5,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A s s e s s m e n t S e a r c h 40 40 20 20 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R e s a l e I t e m s / V e n d i n g M a c h i n e - 1 3 8 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 7 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B i r d F e s t M e r c h a n d i s e S a l e s 39 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 7 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B i r d F e s t M e r c h a n d i s e - W h o l e s a l e 40 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E l e c t i o n C a n d i d a t e F i l i n g F e e s - - 1 , 3 1 6 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 1 . 9 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P a s s p o r t s A n d N a t u r a l i z a t i o n F e e s 40 , 7 7 0 24 , 2 0 0 21 , 0 2 5 14 , 8 2 5 10 , 0 0 0 10,500 500 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e S e r v i c e s S p e c i a l E v e n t s 21 , 0 9 3 12 , 4 6 3 25 , 0 3 8 26 , 1 6 6 26 , 0 0 0 26,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e P r o t e c t i o n S e r v i c e s 18 0 15 0 - 64 46 1 - (461) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A d u l t P r o b a t i o n S e r v i c e C h a r g e 94 , 5 4 2 10 7 , 9 0 8 99 , 2 1 7 82 , 3 9 9 65 , 0 0 0 68,300 3,300 5.1% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 E l e c t r o n i c M o n i t o r i n g 20 , 0 9 0 11 , 7 0 0 12 , 5 8 8 1, 4 4 8 15 0 150 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 E l e c t r o n i c M o n i t o r D u i 6, 6 4 5 6, 3 7 5 3, 6 9 6 78 5 70 0 700 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B o o k i n g F e e s 6, 4 2 9 6, 5 0 6 7, 6 1 2 6, 3 7 0 6, 0 0 0 6,300 300 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e C o n s t r u c t i o n I n s p e c t i o n F e e s 12 , 6 2 5 10 , 0 2 5 6, 8 4 0 6, 9 2 0 6, 0 0 0 6,060 60 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E m e r g e n c y S e r v i c e F e e s 10 , 6 3 5 12 , 3 2 2 21 , 9 5 8 22 , 5 1 4 21 , 0 0 0 21,210 210 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 5 0 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 E m e r g e n c y S e r v i c e F e e s - H a z M a t - - 41 2 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D U I E m e r g e n c y A i d 29 - - 25 0 20 0 200 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 6 0 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E M S T r a n s p o r t U s e r F e e - - 6 8 2 , 2 5 8 61 0 , 0 9 3 84 0 , 0 0 0 84 8 , 5 0 0 8,500 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e - F i n g e r p r i n t i n g 38 0 95 10 15 22 5 300 75 33.3% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C r i m C N V F e e D U I - 1 1 3 71 7 57 1 70 0 700 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 C r i m C on v F e e C t 5, 7 4 4 7, 2 6 3 7, 2 8 2 7, 1 2 4 5, 6 0 0 5,900 300 5.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 C r i m C on v F e e C n 2, 5 8 4 3, 0 4 3 3, 2 3 4 2, 6 7 6 2, 0 0 0 2,100 100 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e T r a i n i n g C l a s s e s 91 5 - 4 , 2 0 2 4, 0 2 8 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 3 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E n g i n e e r i n g F e e s A n d C h a r g e s 13 4 , 8 4 9 10 9 , 1 9 0 80 , 0 5 7 92 , 7 3 7 10 1 , 0 0 0 10 2 , 0 1 0 1,010 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 3 . 9 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A n i m a l C o n t r o l S h e l t e r 10 , 4 3 6 8, 7 9 8 6, 6 3 5 7, 5 2 9 4, 0 0 0 4,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 4 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A nn u a l V e h i c l e F e e ( T B D ) - - 1 2 0 , 8 3 9 58 5 , 9 5 2 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 Z o n i n g / S u b d i v i s i o n F e e 11 4 , 9 7 1 61 , 6 6 9 57 , 3 9 4 47 , 9 3 6 50 , 0 0 0 55,000 5,000 10.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F i r e P l a n C h e c k F e e s 10 , 1 8 5 6, 8 2 3 3, 2 3 5 4, 0 0 5 3, 2 3 5 3,300 65 2.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P l a n C h e c k i n g F e e s 55 5 , 4 1 1 36 1 , 6 5 2 14 8 , 4 0 6 20 4 , 9 9 1 22 5 , 0 0 0 23 5 , 0 0 0 10,000 4.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P l a n n i n g 1 % I n s p e c t i o n F e e 2, 5 3 3 4, 2 4 3 1, 1 0 6 1, 8 2 9 4, 5 0 0 4,500 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C e r t / P h o t o / R e c o r d S e a r c h F e e - ( 1 4 2 ) - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S . E . P . A . R e v i e w 14 , 7 0 0 5, 1 4 0 3, 4 4 5 3, 3 9 5 6, 0 0 0 6,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S h o r e l i n e P e r m i t - ( 1 , 6 0 0 ) - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 9 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C r it i c a l A r e a S t u d y 21 , 8 7 0 16 , 3 0 0 14 , 5 6 0 23 , 0 6 0 16 , 0 0 0 15,000 (1,000) - 6 . 3 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S w i m P o o l E n t r a n c e F e e s 51 , 6 3 3 50 , 7 2 4 66 , 9 6 4 67 , 6 0 8 49 , 9 7 2 52,471 2,499 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L o c k e r F e e s 48 9 55 7 52 4 57 7 28 4 300 16 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S w i m C l a s s F e e s 62 , 3 2 9 56 , 4 6 5 69 , 9 5 3 64 , 7 4 3 21 , 3 4 5 45,520 24,175 113.3% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P r o g r a m F e e s 70 2 , 0 5 2 80 7 , 5 1 8 82 0 , 7 3 5 83 4 , 3 9 0 86 7 , 0 0 0 80 0 , 0 0 0 (67,000) - 7 . 7 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T a x a bl e R e c r e a t i o n A c t i v i t i e s 5, 1 8 3 8, 6 8 4 5, 3 5 6 6, 4 3 2 5, 6 2 9 12 0 , 0 0 0 114,371 2031.8% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S w i m T e a m / D i v e T e a m - - - - 3 1 , 0 1 6 31,150 134 0.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C a n c e l l a t i o n F e e s - - 50 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 7 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B i r d F e s t R e g i s t r a t i o n F e e s 56 5 61 0 1, 1 2 9 57 0 62 0 620 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 9 . 1 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d R e i m b u r s e m e n t - C o n t r a c t S v c s 1 , 1 1 6 , 8 6 8 1, 1 8 7 , 7 1 7 1, 3 1 8 , 7 7 3 1, 2 8 3 , 8 1 2 1, 5 8 2 , 9 5 6 1, 5 8 2 , 0 6 1 (895) - 0 . 1 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M i s c e l l a n e o u s P o l i c e S e r v i c e s 18 9 - - 32 5 2, 7 5 0 - (2,750) - 1 0 0 . 0 % To t a l C h a r g e s F o r S e r v i c e s 3, 0 4 6 , 4 5 5 2 , 8 9 9 , 5 7 5 3 , 6 2 6 , 1 6 3 4 , 0 2 6 , 9 3 2 3 , 9 6 6 , 5 7 2 4 , 0 6 5 , 1 0 2 9 8 , 5 3 0 2.5%Page 3 of 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 95 of 12 4 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e D e t a i l Ac c o u n t N u m b e r Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e s 20 0 7 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 8 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 9 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 1 E s t i m a t e 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t $$ Change 12-11 % Change 12-11 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P r o o f O f V e h i c l e I n s P e n a l t y 4, 4 7 4 7, 2 2 2 9, 2 9 3 7, 8 5 0 10 , 0 0 0 10,500 500 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T r a f f i c I n f r a c t i o n P e n a l t i e s 54 , 8 5 7 54 , 4 9 3 63 , 6 3 5 58 , 5 9 6 50 , 9 6 3 51,472 509 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 B c T r a f f i c I n f r a c t i o n 17 2 , 5 5 1 26 7 , 0 7 5 28 7 , 2 6 5 28 7 , 6 7 1 27 0 , 0 0 0 28 5 , 0 0 0 15,000 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 C r t C o s t F e e C o d e L e g A s s e s s m e n t - - - - 1 3 , 0 0 0 15,000 2,000 15.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N o n - T r a f f i c I n f r a c t i o n P e n a l t i e s 12 , 5 9 5 4, 7 9 3 6, 6 4 7 1, 4 6 4 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 O t h e r I n f r a c t i o n s ' 0 4 1, 7 2 9 1, 6 0 9 1, 7 6 6 85 1 1, 2 0 0 1,250 50 4.2% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 3 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B o a t i n g S a f e t y - - 24 6 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P a r k i n g I n f r a c t i o n P e n a l t i e s 26 , 8 1 5 24 , 3 8 9 39 , 0 2 5 31 , 6 9 4 32 , 0 0 0 33,000 1,000 3.1% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 P r - H a n d i c a p p e d 5, 1 8 5 6, 8 8 5 4, 4 2 5 2, 6 7 5 80 0 800 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 P a r k i n g I n f r a c t i o n L o c 20 0 26 0 42 0 80 0 60 0 600 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 7 0 . 0 0 P a r k / I N D I S Z O N E - - - 38 9 60 0 600 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D W I P e n a l t i e s 6, 4 6 3 5, 3 8 1 8, 1 0 9 8, 3 3 1 9, 0 0 0 9,500 500 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t h e r C r i m i n a l T r a f M i s d e m P e n 1, 0 9 5 1, 0 3 8 17 0 10 1 50 50 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C r i m i n a l T r a f f i c M i s d e m e a n o r 8 / 0 3 34 , 3 6 9 48 , 8 6 2 54 , 5 3 3 51 , 6 2 7 39 , 0 0 0 40,000 1,000 2.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t h e r N o n - T r a f M i s d e m e a n o r P e n 4, 0 0 1 1, 2 0 5 60 5 89 0 60 0 600 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 O t h e r N o n T r a f f i c M i s d . 8 / 0 3 9, 1 3 9 11 , 1 7 6 13 , 5 0 8 14 , 5 5 7 11 , 0 0 0 11,500 500 4.5% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 8 0 . 0 0 C o u r t D v P e n a l t y A s s e s s m e n t 1, 4 1 8 1, 4 8 2 1, 7 2 7 1, 0 7 8 90 0 950 50 5.6% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C r i m i n a l C o s t s - R e c o u p m e n t s 12 0 , 3 9 7 11 1 , 0 8 7 10 7 , 0 8 1 11 1 , 6 4 1 11 9 , 0 0 0 12 0 , 0 0 0 1,000 0.8% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 J u r y D e m a n d C o s t 38 4 10 9 - - 10 0 100 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 W i t n e s s C o s t s 18 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P u b l i c D e f e n s e R e c o u p m e n t 27 , 3 0 9 30 , 1 5 4 36 , 8 9 4 41 , 0 0 7 39 , 0 0 0 37,000 (2,000) - 5 . 1 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C o u r t I n t e r p r e t e r C o s t 86 1 49 5 34 5 45 0 30 0 300 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 9 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F o r f e i t u r e o f B o n d s a n d D e p o s i t s - - 2 4 , 9 9 5 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 5 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M i s c F i n e s A n d P e n a l t i e s 28 , 6 6 9 15 , 4 0 7 13 , 9 4 6 2, 7 7 8 1, 0 0 0 1,050 50 5.0% To t a l F i n e s a n d F o r f e i t s 51 2 , 5 2 9 5 9 3 , 1 2 1 6 7 4 , 6 3 4 6 2 4 , 4 4 7 5 9 9 , 1 1 3 6 1 9 , 2 7 2 2 0 , 1 5 9 3.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 1 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n v e s t m e n t I n t e r e s t 3 0 3 , 9 3 0 1 1 9 , 6 6 5 3 2 , 8 6 5 1 1 , 0 1 7 9 , 7 0 0 9 , 8 0 0 100 1.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 1 . 1 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n v e s t m e n t S e r v i c e s F e e - - ( 2 4 ) ( 1 6 2 ) - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 U n r e a l i z e d G a i n o n I n v e s t m e t n s - 2 , 9 6 9 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 1 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r e s t O n C ou n t y T a x e s 4 8 , 0 3 7 2 9 , 2 7 9 1 5 , 9 9 6 5 , 8 1 1 2 , 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 (0) 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 1 . 4 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 I n t e r e s t - C o u r t C o l l e c t i o n s 3 , 7 6 8 3 , 6 5 8 2 , 1 5 0 3 , 2 8 2 3 , 0 0 0 3 , 1 5 0 150 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P a r k i n g 3 , 8 5 0 5 , 0 7 9 1 1 , 3 7 2 9 , 9 3 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S p a c e /F a c i l i t i e s R e n t a l s 1 3 1 , 2 7 7 1 2 8 , 3 5 6 1 3 9 , 2 9 6 1 4 5 , 0 2 6 1 3 1 , 7 9 2 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 8,208 6.2% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G y m A n d W e i g h t r o o m F e e s 9 , 4 6 8 6 , 2 9 7 7 , 7 1 0 7 , 7 7 2 7 , 8 0 0 7 , 8 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B r a c k e t R o o m R e n t a l 2 , 5 4 0 8 , 3 7 0 2 , 6 2 1 5 , 2 4 0 8 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 200 25.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L e a s e s L on g - T e r m 1 5 2 , 4 1 8 1 4 2 , 0 0 7 1 6 7 , 9 9 5 1 6 8 , 8 6 6 1 6 4 , 7 6 5 1 7 3 , 4 6 6 8,701 5.3% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 V e n d i n g M a c h i n e C o n c e s s i o n 2 , 1 3 0 1 , 8 0 3 1 , 2 5 9 3 , 5 6 2 4 , 3 1 8 4 , 7 0 0 382 8.8% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t h e r R e n t s & U s e C h a r g e s 1 7 , 5 4 4 15 , 1 7 5 9, 0 2 0 8, 4 4 5 10 , 0 7 8 10,078 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 7 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D o n a t i o n / C o n t r i b u t i o n 15 0 10 0 22 0 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P a r k s D o n a t i o n s 8, 5 1 5 3, 9 7 5 1, 7 0 0 3, 9 0 9 3, 7 0 9 4,800 1,091 29.4% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P o l i c e C o n t r i b u t i o n s F r o m P r i v S o u r c e s 39 , 2 0 2 10 , 7 9 9 9, 7 1 0 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B i r d F e s t C o n t r i b u t i o n s 3, 0 3 4 1, 2 9 6 1, 2 5 2 1, 2 5 0 1, 5 0 0 1,500 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S a l e O f J u n k / S a l v a g e 16 7 - 65 5 1, 3 2 1 20 0 200 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S a l e s O f U n c l a i m P r o p e r t y 1, 5 3 8 4, 0 3 6 5, 4 1 9 4, 8 6 3 4, 0 0 0 4,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C o n f i s c a t e d A n d F o r f e i t e d P r o p e r t y 4, 5 8 5 - 4 , 9 3 5 1, 0 8 2 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t h e r J u d g e m e n t / S e t t l e m e n t 1, 0 3 1 30 0 - 10 0 15 , 0 0 0 200 (14,800) - 9 8 . 7 % Page 4 of 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 96 of 12 4 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e D e t a i l Ac c o u n t N u m b e r Ge n e r a l F u n d R e v e n u e s 20 0 7 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 8 A c t u a l s 2 0 0 9 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s 2 0 1 1 E s t i m a t e 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t $$ Change 12-11 % Change 12-11 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 4 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 P o l i ce J u d g m e n t s / R e s t i t u t i o n - 4 , 5 5 8 1 , 6 4 9 4 7 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 8 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C a s h i e r ' S O v e r a g e s / S h o r t a g e s (4 3 5 ) 96 (1 3 2 ) (2 1 ) (2 0 0 ) (200) - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O t h e r M i s c R e v e n u e s 46 , 4 6 6 13 0 , 9 3 5 6, 4 3 3 5, 6 5 9 3, 0 0 0 3,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 S m a l l O v e r p a y m e n t 70 17 2 14 3 10 5 20 - (20) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 N s f F e e s - P a r k s & R e c 24 0 24 0 15 0 15 0 10 0 - (100) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 N s f F e e s - M u n i c i p a l C o u r t 55 5 78 4 92 0 70 3 50 0 525 25 5.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 N s f F e e s - P o l i c e 30 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 5 0 . 0 0 N s f F e e s - D e v e l S e r v D e p t 30 30 30 - 30 - (30) - 1 0 0 . 0 % 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 P l a n n i n g S i g n R e v e n u e 88 5 1, 2 0 0 1, 9 4 9 3, 1 7 4 2, 0 0 0 2,000 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 8 8 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P r i o r P e r i o d C o r r e c t i o n - 6 0 , 4 7 9 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G O B o n d P r o c e e d s 64 0 , 8 1 9 - - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 5 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S a l e o f F i x e d A s s e t s - - - 9 6 8 , 8 7 2 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n s u r a n c e P r o c e e d s - 1 2 , 5 0 7 2, 8 6 2 - 1 0 , 2 6 3 - (10,263) - 1 0 0 . 0 % To t a l M i s c e l l a n e o u s R e v e n u e 1, 4 2 1 , 8 4 1 6 9 4 , 1 6 6 4 2 8 , 1 5 4 1 , 3 6 0 , 4 2 8 3 8 4 , 4 7 5 3 7 8 , 1 1 9 ( 6 , 3 5 6 ) -1.7% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 1 3 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r - I n 6 1 , 9 4 6 - 2 2 , 3 9 5 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 2 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r ( 1 ) 17 , 0 0 0 17 , 5 1 0 22 , 8 6 2 25 , 0 8 6 25 , 0 8 6 25,086 - 0.0% 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 3 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r - 1 0 , 1 0 0 - - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 3 6 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r - - - 2 4 , 6 8 1 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 5 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r F r o m F u n d 5 1 1 39 , 2 1 3 13 , 7 9 3 - 5 2 5 , 2 3 7 - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 6 0 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r F r o m F l o w e r P r o g r a m - - 3 6 , 5 0 0 - - - 00 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 3 9 7 . 6 0 1 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r F r o m Y o s t P o o l - - 2 1 , 9 8 0 - - - To t a l T r a n s f e r s 11 8 , 1 5 9 4 1 , 4 0 3 1 0 3 , 7 3 7 5 7 5 , 0 0 4 2 5 , 0 8 6 2 5 , 0 8 6 - 0.0% 31 , 5 2 7 , 3 5 0 $ 2 8 , 7 9 6 , 4 6 8 $ 3 3 , 5 5 4 , 5 4 0 $ 3 4 , 2 3 5 , 9 7 0 $ 3 2 , 7 6 8 , 9 1 1 $ 3 3 , 0 0 6 , 5 8 9 $ $ 237,678 0.7% (1 ) I n t e r f u n d T r a n s f e r i n 2 0 1 2 i s f r o m f u n d 1 2 1 f o r C l e r k ' s O f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f p a r k i n g p a s s p r o g r a m . Page 5 of 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 97 of 12 4 AM-4314   Item #: 7. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information  Information Subject Title Public hearing on the 2012 proposed budget. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff None. Previous Council Action None. Narrative Public hearing on 2012 proposed budget. Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 02:08 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/27/2011 03:00 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 04:28 PM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/27/2011 01:28 PM Final Approval Date: 10/27/2011  Packet Page 98 of 124 AM-4317   Item #: 8. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:30 Minutes   Submitted By:Rob Chave Department:Planning Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Public hearing on the recommendation of the Planning Board concerning a potential amendment to the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan map that would adjust the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center to remove existing single family-designated areas from the Activity Center. The Board recommended amendments to the policy language rather than changing the boundaries. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the recommendation of the Planning Board and direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance implementing the change (see language changes recommended in Exhibit 1). Previous Council Action In September, 2010, the City Council asked the Planning Board to review the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center boundary as part of its 2011 comprehensive plan review. Narrative In September of 2010, the City Council asked the Planning Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center during 2011. The specific request was as follows: COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO PLACE REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCKET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. [see Exhibit 4, middle of page 16] The original intent of including nearby small-lot single family areas in the activity centers (both downtown and in the medical area) was to emphasize that single family areas should be considered to be part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas. In other words, given that Edmonds is dominated by single family development, the point was to indicate that wholesale changes were not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed use and pedestrian-oriented activity. After holding a public hearing, the Planning Board opted to recommend adding policy language in the plan's discussion of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center that would further clarify this intent. Exhibit 1 includes shows the text amendment recommended by the Board. Attachments Exhibit 1: Draft Plan Amendment Language Exhibit 2: Existing Plan Language Packet Page 99 of 124 Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map detail Exhibit 4: Planning Board Minutes Exhibit 5: City Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/27/2011 03:54 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/28/2011 10:07 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 10:20 AM Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 10/27/2011 02:20 PM Final Approval Date: 10/28/2011  Packet Page 100 of 124 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high-intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian-friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park-like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: A. Goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.  To expand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center;  Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter-connected development;  Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets;  Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians;  To provide a buffer between the high-intensity, high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West;  To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for both neighborhood conservation and targeted redevelopment that includes an appropriate mixes of single family and multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities;  To provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds;  To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. Packet Page 101 of 124 Within the activity center, policies to achieve these goals include the following: A.1. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher-intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. A.2. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. A.3. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. A.4. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region. A.5. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale streetscape design. A.6. Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center – and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor – should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. A.7. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses.   Packet Page 102 of 124 Land Use 61 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high-intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian-friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park-like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: A. Goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. • To expand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center; • Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter-connected development; • Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets; • Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians; • To provide a buffer between the high-intensity, high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West; • To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for redevelopment that mixes multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities; • To provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds; • To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. Packet Page 103 of 124 62 Land Use Within the activity center, policies to achieve these goals include the following: A.1. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher-intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. A.2. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. A.3. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. A.4. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region. A.5. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale streetscape design. A.6. Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center – and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor – should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. A.7. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses. Packet Page 104 of 124 Land Use 63 B. Goals for the Highway 99 Corridor. Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential neighborhoods. Historically, the corridor has developed in a patchwork of uses, without a clear focus or direction. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City established a task force in 2003-2004, resulting in the Highway 99 Enhancement Report and a related economic analysis. During this process, local residents were contacted and asked to participate in two focus groups to identify current problems and future aspirations for the corridor. After this preliminary survey with the residents, the City invited business owners to participate in two charrette meetings to brainstorm ideas and evaluate possible ways to induce redevelopment in the area. After concepts were developed, Berk & Associates, an economics consultant, performed a market assessment of the enhancement strategy. The following diagram summarizes the general approach that resulted from this work: a series of focus areas providing identity and a clustering of activity along the corridor, providing opportunities for improved economic development while also improving linkages between the corridor and surrounding residential areas. Packet Page 105 of 124 64 Land Use With this background in mind, specific goals for the Highway 99 Corridor include: • Improve access and circulation. Access to businesses for both pedestrians and automobiles is difficult along major portions of the corridor. The inability of pedestrians to cross the street and for automobiles to make safe turns is a critical limitation on enhanced development of the corridor into a stronger economic area. Better pedestrian crossings are also needed to support transit use, especially as Highway 99 becomes the focus of future high capacity transit initiatives. • The City should consider the different sections along the corridor and emphasize their unique opportunities rather than view the corridor as an undifferentiated continuum. Street improvements and, in some cases regulatory measures can encourage these efforts. Focus on specific nodes or segments within the corridor. Identity elements such as signage should indicate that the corridor is within the City of Edmonds, and show how connections can be made to downtown and other Edmonds locations. • Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. During the City’s Highway 99 Task Force work, residents noted that they needed a number of services that are not presently provided along the corridor. This can provide an opportunity that might be part of a larger business strategy. At the same time, new development should contribute to the residential quality of the adjacent neighborhoods. • Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. For example, a tall hotel or large scale retail development may be an excellent addition to the south of the corridor while some small restaurants and convenience shops might cater to hospital employees, trail users and local residents near 216th Street SW. Where needed, the City should consider zoning changes to encourage mixed use or taller development to occur. Within the Highway 99 corridor, policies to achieve these goals include the following: B.1. Provide a system of “focus areas” along the corridor which provide opportunities for clusters of development, or themed development areas. Providing focus points for development is intended to help encourage segmentation of the long Highway 99 corridor into distinct activity nodes which will encourage an Edmonds character and identity for the corridor. Concepts for the different focus areas identified on the previous page include the following: Packet Page 106 of 124 Land Use 65 The “ Hospital Community and Family Retail Center” would be positioned to take advantage of its proximity to the many hospital and related medical services in the area and it would be easily reachable from the Interurban trail. The idea of an “ International District” is organized around the international flavor of development in the area combined with the concepts of visibility and internal connection. Access to the “ District” is marked by specific gateways, and the many focal points for activity in the area (and the new development in between) are connected with a strong pedestrian corr idor. The “ Residential Area Retail Center” concept allows for mixed use development while providing access and services to adjacent residential neighborhoods. Similar mixed use development, linked to surrounding neighborhoods, could occur i n the “ Commercial Redevelopment/Hotels Improvement Area.” In addition, this area has the potential to provide large sites suitable for larger commercial or mixed use development, such as hotels or large retail complexes. Internal circulation between sites is a key to development. Packet Page 107 of 124 66 Land Use B.2. Provide for pedestrian access and circulation within development focus areas, while coordinating with high-capacity transit along the Highway 99 corridor. B.3. Use traffic signals, access management, and rechannelization to facilitate pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic capacity along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with WSDOT on these issues, and to develop a circulation management plan. In some cases the impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by access management, rechannelization and other measures. B.4. New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. B.5. Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses. B.6. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially-zoned properties. B.7. Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian-friendly (e.g., add trees and landscaping) through a combination of development requirements and – when available – public investment. B.8. Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existing development while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential neighborhoods. B.9. Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor. Establish uniform signage regulations for all properties within the corridor area which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter and distraction to the public. B.10. The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor. When these uses are proposed to be located within one of the corridor focus areas, these uses should also comply with the goals and policies outlined for each focus area. B.11. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: B.11.a. Supported by adequate services and facilities; Packet Page 108 of 124 Land Use 67 B.11.b. Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, articulated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. B.11.c. Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including automobile, transit and pedestrian access. B.11.d. Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. Master Planned Development Master Planned Developments are areas dominated by a special set of circumstances which allow for a highly coordinated, planned development, with phasing over time. These master plans describe a special purpose and need for the facilities and uses identified, and provide a clear design which fits with the character of their surroundings. The master plans describe the land use parameters and relationships to guide future development on the sites (height, bulk, types and arrangements of uses, access and circulation). All development within areas identified in each master plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the master plan. When located within a designated activity center, development within a master plan area shall be consistent with the goals and policies identified for the surrounding activity center. The following Master Plans are adopted by reference: A. Edmonds-Woodway High School B. Stevens Hospital C. City Park D. Pine Ridge Park E. Southwest County Park F. The Edmonds Crossing project, as identified in the Final EIS for Edmonds Crossing issued on November 10, 2004. In addition to the master plans listed above, master plans can also be implemented through zoning contracts or other implementation actions, rather than being adopted as part of the plan. In these cases, the master plan must still be consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies for the area. Packet Page 109 of 124 2 2 0 T H S T S W 2 1 2 T H S T S W B O W D O I N W A Y O N R / W 2 1 0 T H S T S W 2 0 6 T H S T S W 2 2 2 N D S T S W 7 7 T H P L W 8 3 R D A V E W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 3 T H P L S W 2 0 8 T H P L S W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 7 3 R D P L W 0 7 T H S T S W 2 2 1 S T P L S W W O O D L A K E D R 2 2 0 T H P L S W M A I N S T 8 3 R D A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 2 1 1 T H P L 8 0 T H A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 8 1 S T A V E W 7 6 T H A V E W 7 7 T H A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 7 2 N D A V E W H W Y 9 9 6 8 T H A V E W 2 1 2 T H S T S W H W Y 9 9 N W T R A C T I O N R / W 2 1 6 T H S T S W 2 0 9 T H S T S W 2 1 0 T H P L S W 2 0 6 T H P L 2 1 9 T H S T S W 6 8 T H A V E W Y 9 9 2 2 0 T H S T S W 8 0 T H P L W 7 0 T H A V E W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 8 0 T H A V E W 7 6 T H A V E W 7 7 T H P L W 7 8 T H A V E W S U M M I T L N W 8 5 T H P L W 2 1 9 T H S T S W 7 8 T H P L W 8 0 T H P L W 2 1 1 T H P L 7 8 T H P L W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 7 8 T H A V E W 2 0 9 T H S T S W 7 7 T H P L W 2 1 3 T H S T S W 7 8 T H A V E W 8 4 T H P L W 8 5 T H P L W 7 4 T H A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 7 8 T H P L W 8 1 S T A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 2 0 7 T H P L 7 6 T H P L W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 4 T H P L S W 8 3 R D A V E W 7 9 T H A V E W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 8 6 T H P L W 8 1 S T P L W 2 1 5 T H P L S W 8 3 R D P L 8 6 T H A V E W 2 1 4 T H P L S W 8 2 N D A V E W 7 7 T H A V E W 8 4 T H A V E W 7 2 N D A V E W 2 2 1 S T P L S W 2 1 6 T H S T S W H W Y 9 9 6 3 R D A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 2 1 0 T H S T S W 2 1 2 T H S T S W 6 6 T H A V E W 6 7 T H A V E W N W T R A C T I O N R / W 2 1 4 T H S T S W 2 1 3 T H P 2 1 5 T H S 6 7 T H A V E W 6 6 T H A V E W 2 1 6 T H S T S W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 2 1 9 T H S T S W 6 6 T H A V E W 6 4 T H A V E W 2 2 0 T H S T S W 2 2 2 N D S T 2 2 0 T H P L 2 2 1 S T P L 2 2 1 S T P L S W 6 7 T H P L W A l b i o n Me d i c a l / H i g h w a y 9 9 Ac t i v i t y C e n t e r Fi v e Co r n e r s Ed m o n d s W o o d w a y Hi g h S c h o o l St e v e n s Ho s p i t a l Ch a s e L a k e El e m e n t a r y P ar k Co l l e g e P l a c e Mi d d l e S c h o o l Packet Page 110 of 124 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2011 Page 8 Board Member Johnson noted that $20,000 was identified in 2012 for a Transportation Plan update. Mr. Chave explained that it is time for the City to review future land use patterns in preparation for the next Comprehensive Plan update. This money would be used to hire a consultant to help staff extend the projections in the Transportation Plan out to 2035 and perhaps beyond. However, the update will not involve reworking the policies. VICE CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND DRAFT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (FILE NUMBER AMD20110006) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BASED ON THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE BOARD. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING ON POTENTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP ADJUSTING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER TO REMOVE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DESIGNATED AREAS FROM THE ACTIVITY CENTER (FILE NUMBER AMD20100024) Mr. Chave reviewed that at the end of 2010, the City Council asked the Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center during 2011. The issue was brought forward when a property owner proposed the idea of rezoning single-family zoned property along 220th Street. The subject property was located within the boundaries of the activity center, and nearby residential property owners expressed opposition to the change. These property owners mistakenly thought that because the subject property was located within the activity center, it was presumed that the zoning could be changed. Mr. Chave recalled that at a previous meeting, the Board discussed that the intent of including nearby small-lot single-family areas in both the Downtown and Medical/Highway 99 Activity Centers was to emphasize that single-family areas could be considered to be part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas. The point was to indicate that wholesale changes are not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented activity. Downtown Edmonds is a perfect example of this concept in that there are numerous single-family residential homes clustered around the commercial and multi-family residential areas, and there is a lot of pedestrian activity. The City is hoping the same thing will occur in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center as redevelopment takes place. Mr. Chave emphasized that including single-family residential properties in the activity center does not mean that the zoning is expected to change. In fact, he reminded the Board that the City Council recently made the decision to reclassify properties on 216th Street (within the activity center) from mixed-use to single-family residential. This action argues for the integrity of having single-family residential properties included in the activity center. Mr. Chave said staff is recommending that the current activity center boundaries be maintained to include single-family residential properties. Instead, staff is proposing that the policy statements be amended to assure that the overall intent is clear. He reviewed the current activity center boundaries. Chair Lovell summarized that staff is recommending the policy statements be amended to make it clear that single-family residential properties can be located within the activity center without being threatened. The boundary would not be changed. NO ONE WAS PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE. THEREFORE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chair Lovell noted that the policy statements talk about encouraging the appropriate mixture of uses and neighborhood cohesiveness. They also talk about pedestrian corridors and other elements to encourage walkability. However, none of these issues were addressed by the new Dick’s Restaurant that was recently completed. Mr. Chave explained that not a lot can be done with a small project of this type, but the Highway 99 Task Force is currently talking about ideas for encouraging transit-oriented development for a larger area with connections to other areas of the activity center. Chair Lovell asked if the hospital has indicated support for the current activity center boundaries and the proposed amendments to the policy statements. Mr. Chave said the hospital campus is already specifically identified in the activity center. If the hospital wants to alter surrounding uses, they would have to approach the City with a request to change the Packet Page 111 of 124 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2011 Page 9 Comprehensive Plan, just like any other property owner. He said he does not believe the proposed change would impact the hospital. Vice Chair Reed observed that it is helpful to view the Zoning Map and Comprehensive Plan Map side by side so the sequence of zoning is evidence. He summarized that the zoning within the activity center is diverse. Mr. Chave agreed and explained that the hallmark of mixed-use development is that it does not mean a single type of development or zone. It means a mixture of zones and uses, with features and connections that work together to create the environment. It is important to emphasize that single-family residential uses are not exclusive of their surroundings, but are part of them. He clarified that changing the zoning of a single-family residential property would require not only a rezone, but a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as well. This would be true regardless of whether the property is located within the activity center or not. Chair Lovell asked if residents of the Esperance area are allowed to comment on the proposed amendment. Mr. Chave answered that all citizens, regardless of whether they are residents of Edmonds, are allowed to comment at any public hearing. Vice Chair Reed recalled that a huge crowd attended a Planning Board Meeting at which a property owner presented a proposal to rezone a pocket of single-family residential property located within the activity center. Mr. Chave clarified that he is not sure why the issue came before the Board because no rezone application was filed. The property owner was actually asking the City Council for an exception to the deadline for submitting Comprehensive Plan amendment proposals. The City Council denied the property owner’s request, and the issue never came up again. Board Member Tibbott asked why the Five Corners area was not included in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Mr. Chave answered that because of its location and its unique characteristics, staff believes it should be treated as its own activity center. Board Member Johnson asked about the status of the Urban Center designation relative to Sound Transit’s evaluation of routes. Mr. Chave explained that Urban Center is a regional planning designation that has extremely high criteria in terms of population density, employment density, etc. It is possible to consider an Urban Center designation for at least a portion of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, but it would require extreme densities. He acknowledged that achieving an Urban Center density would give the City the ability to target regional transportation dollars; but at this point, the Highway 99 Task Force is considering taking a smaller step by looking at transit-oriented development in a couple of nodes along the Highway 99 Corridor. He added that it would be costly to perform the studies necessary to obtain an Urban Center designation. He concluded that while an Urban Center designation is not beyond the realm of possibilities, the Highway 99 Task Force believes that transit-oriented development makes more sense given the current demand. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE POLICY AMENDMENTS CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT 1 (FILE NUMBER AMD20100024) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER TIBBOTT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Chave announced that Strategic Planning Meetings have been scheduled for the 3rd Tuesday of each month during the City Council’s regular meetings. Mr. Chave reported that Mr. Lien is working to obtain a formalized response from the Department of Ecology that they will extend the deadline for completion of the Shoreline Master Program as long as the City can show they are making progress. He also announced that information related to the Shoreline Master Program can be accessed from the new City website, which will be up and running soon. Vice Chair Reed reported that he is currently reviewing the draft article prepared by Board Member Stewart to describe the Shoreline Master Program Update process and identify how the community can get involved. Once he finishes his review, Packet Page 112 of 124 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 14 Mr. Lien summarized that staff will continue to work through and revise the regulations in ECDC 24, update and finalize the restoration plan, and update and finalize the cumulative impact analysis. Once a draft SMP is available, the Board will begin the public outreach process. He recalled that Board Member Stewart has prepared a press release to notify the public of the SMP Update. City staff is working to update the City’s website, which includes a direct link to the SMP Project. A SEPA review must be done, and a 60-day notice must be posted. The Planning Board will continue to hold workshop discussions and provide direction to staff. Public hearings will be conducted at both the Planning Board and City Council levels. Board Member Stewart recommended that the Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standard Table (ECDC 24.40.090) be amended so the shore setback for the Urban Mixed Use III Environment is set at the more conservative range of 35 feet rather than the proposed 25 feet. She said she would like the setback even greater than 35 feet, but given the sensitive environment and the fact that it is changeable, it would be wise to have a minimum 35-foot setback requirement. Board Member Johnson thanked Executive Director McChesney, Commissioner Block and Keeley O’Connell for providing valuable input to the Commission. Their comments helped her understand the process and view the regulations in a practical environment. Ms. O’Connell clarified that she is just a single representative of Friends of the Edmonds Marsh. She said she would like to take the Board’s discussion to the entire committee for feedback before providing a formal response. She said that Friends of the Edmonds Marsh is concerned about finding the appropriate balance between public access and protecting the environment. She acknowledged that without public interaction, the desire to protect the habitat would not be as strong. On the other hand, overuse can significantly impact habitat values. She reiterated that the marsh is an extremely rare habitat remaining in Puget Sound and is absolutely essential to the recovery of salmon. It also provides essential habitat for Blue Heron, which were significantly impacted by the condominium development and are just coming back to the area. Even in its current condition, the marsh is an extremely diverse and important habitat. Restoring it to allow salmon back is vital to the recovery plan for Puget Sound. Vice Chair Reed referred to the draft press release that was prepared by Board Member Stewart. The news release is intended to inform the public of the Board’s work on the SMP Update. It could also be added to the City’s website. He suggested Board Members forward input regarding the draft press release to Board Member Stewart via email. He volunteered to meet with Board Member Stewart to summarize the main points and finalize the press release. Board Member Clarke referred to an email communication the Board Members received from Council Member Petso. At the bottom of the email was a reference about not having the City Council email back and forth since that would constitute a meeting. He asked if this same policy would apply to the Board. Vice Chair Reed said that is why he suggested that Board Members email their input directly to Board Member Stewart. He cautioned against sending the individual comments to all Board Members since this could constitute a meeting. The Board took a short break at 9:48 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:56 p.m. REVIEW OF MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER BOUNDARY Mr. Chave said the Staff Report included minutes from the City Council meeting where the City Council asked the Planning Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center as part of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket. He explained that the original intent of including nearby small-lot, single-family residential areas in the activity centers (both downtown and the medical area) was to emphasize that single-family areas could be considered part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas that involve a variety of uses. He advised that it was never the City’s intent that all development within the boundaries for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center is supposed to be the same. The intent was to illustrate to the powers that be at the regional and county level that you don’t have to just have multi-family and mixed-use development in order to have walkable neighborhoods. This approach actually encourages walkable pedestrian connections between the residential areas and other parts of the activity centers. However, some single-family residential property owners now have the misunderstanding that their properties are destined to be rezoned. Mr. Chave referred to a situation where a developer expressed an interest in purchasing a single-family residential property within the southwestern corner of the activity center. Their plan was to change the Comprehensive Plan to allow the property to be rezoned to a commercial designation. Just because the property is within the activity center boundary does not mean it can be rezoned. He emphasized that a Comprehensive Plan amendment would be required in order to change the Packet Page 113 of 124 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 15 zoning on a parcel that is identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map as single-family residential. He further emphasized that changing the boundaries would not change a single-family residential property’s ability to rezone. If the boundaries are redrawn to exclude the single-family residential properties from the activity center, a rezone would still require a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Whether or not the boundaries are changed, Mr. Chave said this review is helpful to get the message out that single-family residential zones can work in mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented activity centers. He recommended the Board conduct a public hearing to gather input. As part of the hearing, he would like an opportunity explain the reasons for including small-lot, single-family residential areas in activity centers. Board Member Cloutier suggested it would be helpful to explain what the intent of the activity center designation and then review the boundary based on what it is supposed to do. As an aside, it could be pointed out that the boundaries have no effect on the underlying zoning. Mr. Chave said that the activity center boundaries were intended to identify areas within the City where future growth and change was presumed to happen in the future, but restrict the growth to a certain range and mixture of uses. Activity within the mixed-use areas is likely to intensify, but the single-family areas are not expected to change. The point is to make connections between the residential areas and mixed-use commercial areas. He suggested the Board could review the policy statement and perhaps add a phrase to reinforce the idea that single-family residential can be part of the mix and multi-family residential development is not necessary to create walkable neighborhoods. Board Member Johnson said it appears the activity center extends further south on Highway 99. She suggested that staff provide a map at the public hearing to illustrate the entire activity center boundary. Mr. Chave agreed but noted that the City Council’s specific discussion was focused on the residential areas. Board Member Clarke asked staff to provide background information on the single-family residential properties that are located on 215th Street Southwest adjacent to the hospital. Mr. Chave replied that Jim Underhill, representing his small neighborhood, approached the City with a Comprehensive Plan amendment request to change the land use designation for the properties along 215th Street Southwest. The Planning Board forwarded a recommendation to the City Council not to make the change, but the City Council ultimately decided to approve the Comprehensive Plan change to designate this small area as single-family residential. He suggested the Board could argue that the City Council has already concluded that single-family residential works within an activity center. Board Member Johnson said there was a similar situation in the City of Bellevue where a small, cohesive single-family residential neighborhood was located next to Overlake Hospital. The entire neighborhood decided to sell their properties to the hospital. This involved a long public process. Mr. Chave said he would not rule out the possibility that a group of property owners would make this decision, but there are no plans to do so at this time. Board Member Johnson recalled that undeveloped parcels along 220th Street Southwest were the subject of another application. Mr. Chave noted that 220th Street is the southern boundary line of the activity center. A property owner on 220th Street approached the City with an application to rezone property that was not adjacent to the existing multi- family/commercial zones. This application raised neighborhood concern. The applicant asked for an exception to the rule that limits Comprehensive Plan amendments to once per year, and the City Council declined to entertain the amendment. Vice Chair Reed asked if staff has any idea when Swedish Edmonds Hospital will provide information regarding their proposed long-range plans. Mr. Chave said the hospital has had preliminary discussions with staff about long-range planning, but their focus now is on getting their current projects done. He agreed to check with Mr. Clifton about when the hospital’s long-range plans might come forward. He reminded the Board that the hospital’s current master plan was adopted in the late 1990’s, and it is due for an update. Mr. Chave referred to Activity Center Policy A.5, which calls for activity centers to support a mixture of uses without encroaching into single-family neighborhoods. This includes the single-family neighborhoods both within and outside of the activity center. He emphasized that wholesale changes are not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented activities. Hopefully, this assurance can be emphasized at the public hearing. Board Member Johnson said many of the people that opposed the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment idea lived across the street in Esperance. She asked if the City should coordinate their land uses in the activity center to be consistent Packet Page 114 of 124 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 16 with those of the County. Mr. Chave replied that most of the County’s commercial development is also located along Highway 99, but their residential densities are generally more intense. Vice Chair Reed announced that the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Boundaries is scheduled for a public hearing on September 28th. Staff is recommending that the Board reinforce the benefits of including single-family residential zones as part of the activity center. They could also come up with new language in the Comprehensive Plan to further emphasize the variety of uses that can exist in an activity center. Mr. Chave suggested that two options could be advertised for the public hearing: retain the current boundaries and acknowledge that single-family residential fits within the activity center and is protected by existing policies or eliminate the single-family residential properties from the activity center. Board Member Clarke noted that most of the communities within the Puget Sound area have accommodated health care related expansion by creating specific zoning, master plans, etc. The hospital is now becoming landlocked by other uses that are not medical related. He questioned how the zone could be expanded to encourage additional medical uses. Mr. Chave suggested when the hospital approaches the Board to discuss their long-range plan, the Board could ask them to identify what the City could do to further their long-range plans and what they see as far as surrounding development needs versus what might happen on their campus proper. This would give the Board an idea of what they should focus the discussion on. Hopefully, this extensive master plan update will occur within the next few years. He reminded the Board that the City is required to complete a major Comprehensive Plan update in 2014. Board Member Johnson said she attended the Citizens Economic Development Committee meeting where representatives from Swedish Edmonds Hospital provided a presentation. She learned that the hospital owns numerous properties such as the Value Village property. Board Member Clarke pointed out that Top Foods and Dicks Drive-In are located at the southwest corner of the activity center so the hospital cannot expand to the south. They cannot expand to the north either, and there is only limited property to the east. They can’t expand west because of the high school. Board Member Johnson suggested that when the Board reviews the Comprehensive Plan update, they can also look at the auxiliary land use needs. A hospital generates all types of support such as doctor’s offices, imaging facilities, and medical supply stores. It is important to ensure there is adequate land available for redevelopment or these opportunities will go elsewhere when the demand increases. Vice Chair Reed summarized that the Board’s options are to adjust the lines so that the single-family residential areas are located outside the activity center. Another option would be to retain the existing boundaries. He suggested the Board move forward with a public hearing to allow citizens to comment on the two options. He noted there are additional single-family residential neighborhoods located on the southern boundary of the activity center. He questioned if the boundary should also be redrawn to exclude these other small single-family residential areas. Mr. Chave agreed that would be appropriate. Board Member Cloutier suggested that rather than adjusting the boundaries, the activity center language could be amended to make the intent clearer. Mr. Chave agreed to suggest amendments to the activity center language to clarify the reasons for including single-family residential within the activity center. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Vice Chair Reed referred the Board to the extended agenda. Mr. Chave noted that he would not be available to attend the special meeting the Board scheduled for September 7th. The Board’s September 14th meeting was cancelled so that Board Members could attend the kick off meeting for the Strategic Plan. He suggested the Board cancel the special meeting since the City has more time to complete the SMP update than originally anticipated. The Board agreed to cancel the special meeting as recommended by staff. Mr. Chave recalled that in the past, staff has provided a presentation to the Board regarding the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) prior to the public hearing. He noted that the public hearing is scheduled for September 28th, so September 7th would be the only opportunity for staff to provide a preview. The Board agreed that staff could provide written information by September 14th for the Board to review in preparation for the public hearing on September 28th. The Board could forward questions to staff, and staff could provide a response on September 28th prior to the public hearing. Packet Page 115 of 124 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 12 decided that given the economic development direction from the Council, it should be considered. The Planning Board’s consideration resulted in the recommendation provided to the City Council. Council President Bernheim asked who suggested the categorical exemption for 40 parking spaces, 12,000 square foot building and 20 units? Mr. Lien stated it was staff’s suggestion. The Planning Board requested staff present proposals; that was one of several proposals considered by the Planning Board. Council President Bernheim referred to Section 20.15A.130.E.3 that states “The applicant’s proposed mitigation measures, clarifications, changes or conditions must be in writing and must be specific.” He expressed concern with the proposed additional language, “For example, proposals to “control noise” or “prevent stormwater runoff” are inadequate, whereas proposals to “muffle machinery to X decibel” or “construct 200-foot stormwater retention pond at Y location” are adequate.” Mr. Lien answered that language was taken from the model ordinance. Council President Bernheim referred to a section that states the City shall share the EIS consultant rather than the City having sole authority. Mr. Lien answered that was also taken from the model ordinance. Council President Bernheim asked why this much time was being spent on the amendment if it would have only impacted 2 projects in the past 25 years? Mr. Lien answered he was surprised by the number of projects that would not be exempt by the proposal. The Planning Board recommended this amendment as part of the SEPA update. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how long it took to complete a SEPA checklist. Mr. Lien answered it depends on the complexity of the project; it could take one to a few hours depending on the person’s familiarity with the project and how much information is included. Councilmember Buckshnis commented in view of all the other requirements, completing a checklist would not be much more burdensome. Mr. Lien answered the checklist was only part of the process. SEPA adds to the permit “hoops” a developer would need to go through. The Comprehensive Plan addresses streamlining the permit process. This was one thing that could be done to streamline the permit process. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Colleen McDonald, Edmonds, a resident of unincorporated Esperance within 300 feet of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, expressed her opposition to the proposed changes to the exemption thresholds for the Activity Center area. One of the goals for the Medical Activity Center in the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to avoid encroaching into single family neighborhoods; this proposed change would do just that. While the proposed change would only affect a small number of projects according to planning staff, the magnitude of the increase is substantial for those living next to a project; 4 houses to 20 houses, 40,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet for commercial building, and 20 parking spaces to 40 parking spaces. She pointed a large residential neighborhood was currently included in the Medical Activity Center and sections of the Center border other neighborhoods. She supported development in appropriate locations and would be willing to consider changes if there were a way to appeal an exemption; according to the current wording, an exemption was final and there was no opportunity for appeal. Approving this change would send a message to residents in neighborhood within the Medical Activity Center that commercial development was more important than preserving neighborhoods. She questioned the proposal to expand the threshold to the maximum allowed, commenting that may be appropriate for a large city but not for Edmonds. She urged the Council to vote against the proposed change in the interest of the families who live in the targeted areas. Todd Cloutier, Edmonds, commented the flexible thresholds could be omitted and the remaining changes adopted without any noticeable impact. He commented on the inappropriate use of SEPA to control development when the intent of SEPA is environmental protection. The City controls Packet Page 116 of 124 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 13 development via the development code not by misapplication of environmental concerns to achieve development goals. He acknowledged there were real development concerns in the Medical Activity Center area and there are numerous single family residences in that area. The area needs to be reviewed in more detail, an issue separate from this SEPA proposal. A recent proposal for a large medical facility in the Medical Activity Center zone located within a residential neighborhood highlighted the problem with the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. SEPA is not the correct tool to stop that development; the development code is. The Planning Board recommended tailoring the SEPA review level to the area, areas with proposed raised thresholds are completely built out and the environment is already understood and development regulations prevent doomsday development regulations. The expected impact of changes to the flexible thresholds is minimal. SEPA checklists are not a large burden and if there is an environmental concern, it should be addressed. He recommended adoption of the proposed SEPA changes with the exception of the new flexible thresholds. To address the real development problems in the Medical Activity Center, he recommended a reassessment of the boundaries of that area in the Comprehensive Plan as well as a review of the zoning in that area. He voiced a similar concern along Highway 99, commenting that although Highway 99 was appropriately zoned, the areas directly adjacent should be considered as a transition area. Joe St. Laurent, stated he represents James Klug, the majority land owner on this block within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. He relayed Mr. Klug’s concurrence with Ms. McDonalds’s and Mr. Cloutier’s comments. He stated Mr. Klug’s opposition to the proposed changes in the flexible thresholds. The neighborhood within the 200th Avenue West, 80th Avenue West, and 76th Avenue West area is a prosperous middle class neighborhood. Mr. Klug is a majority land owner on the block proposed to be developed by Kruger Clinic, Blue Star and Tony Shapiro into a 4-story, 30,000 square foot mixed commercial use medical building. This project is not a minor intrusion into the neighborhood; it will have a major impact on an area already impacted by traffic, drainage and congestion issues. It appears the City is trying to push development of this area and eliminate the middle class and affordable housing in this area for commercial enterprises that may provide minimal tax revenue to the City. If a project is exempt from SEPA, he wanted to ensure that due process was available for citizens to voice their concerns and participate in the process as well as the ability to appeal any decision. Marian Bacon, Edmonds, a resident on 220th for 48 years, explained 220th is very busy and a main corridor to Edmonds and she feared commercial development in their neighborhood would increase traffic volumes. Her neighborhood is a residential area and once businesses begin to move in, historically there is more than one business. Businesses locating in their neighborhood will reduce home values. She asked whether any Councilmember would be willing to have a commercial building across the street from their home. She concurred with the comments made by the previous speakers. Cathy Lester, Edmonds, a resident in the middle of the Activity Center, encouraged the Council to vote against the SEPA exemption in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. She pointed out the diversity of neighborhoods in the Activity Center that includes many single family residential homes. A blanket exemption for larger developments is not feasible in an area where there is such diversity. The larger a development proposal is, 20 homes versus 4 homes, 12,000 square feet versus 4,000 square feet, the more important it is to have a thorough review of the project and SEPA is an integral part of the process. If as the case study provided by staff states, SEPA likely would not significantly add to the review process for the formal subdivision, she suggested keeping the review process as it currently exists. She questioned the compelling reason for adopting the SEPA exemption for these two areas. She did not support any reduction in the process or public notice for development of any size. She was also uncomfortable with leaving the Department of Ecology out of the process which the exemption would do. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, recommended the Council not approve the proposed exemptions, pointing out the benefit to the developer versus the cost to Edmonds citizens was not balanced. Greater harm was possible to the environment and citizens’ right to participate under the proposed exemption. Changes in Packet Page 117 of 124 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 14 the Highway 99 Corridor zoning allowed nearly unlimited development; however, there are residential areas close to Highway 99 that are affected. He suggested the case study for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center was not the correct study; the medical center and accompanying parking lot would have been a more appropriate case study. He referred to Council President Bernheim’s question regarding how this proposal originated, envisioning it was staff-driven or it was simply change for the sake of change. He suggested the number of regulations referred to in the case study created the delay in the permit process, not SEPA. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, pointed out comments regarding the Medical Activity Center highlight concerns with the borders of that zone. He agreed with Mr. Cloutier’s suggestion to reassess the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center as well as the zoning within that area and suggested that be done before the SEPA thresholds were changed. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, one of two citizen representatives on the Highway 99 Task Force for Economic Development and one of seventeen commissioners on the Economic Development Commission, stated he was not speaking on either group’s behalf but as a citizen who lives in the Aurora Marketplace Neighborhood near Highway 99. He supported intelligent economic development throughout the City. He did not support economic development that did not take into consideration the impact of development on long established neighborhoods. He supported the comments made in an email from Jim Underhill, his citizen colleague on the Highway 99 Task Force as well as the comments of Ms. McDonald and others in her neighborhood who spoke against the proposed changes. He urged the Council to build in protections for single family neighborhoods that surround Highway 99 and the Medical Activity Center before embarking on a relaxation of regulations that could adversely affect long established neighborhoods. Appropriate development on Highway 99 and in the Medical Activity Center should be permitted but as that development begins to encroach on and impact surrounding neighborhoods, neighborhood protections should be in place to appropriately lessen the encroachment and impact. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Wilson asked whether a change to the Comprehensive Plan needed to be initiated by the Council or citizens. Mr. Lien answered it could come from the Council or citizens. The deadline to submit a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is December 31. To place an item on the docket for next year, it would need to be submitted by December 31, 2010. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Council could request an emergency amendment be expedited this year. Mr. Lien answered it would be difficult to complete a Comprehensive Plan change by yearend. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Council should give the Planning Board specific direction to consider the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. Mr. Lien explained that was an issue separate from the proposed SEPA update under discussion. If the City Council chose, they could provide policy direction to the Planning Board to consider the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. With regard to how this proposal originated, Councilmember Wilson recalled an April 21, 2009 meeting when 65 citizens on the Levy Review Committee stated, 1) we need a levy, and 2) to avoid a future levy, the City needs to work on economic development. In addition, the Council passed a resolution creating an Economic Development Commission. Within that context, it was reasonable that the Planning Board and staff would look for ways to expedite economic development. It is now 14-16 months later, there are three new Councilmembers and a new Mayor. He appreciated staff and the Planning Board asking the question, commenting it was now up to the Council to make a decision. Council President Bernheim expressed concern that major policy changes were included in the draft along with updates that were technical corrections. The proposed change to the SEPA threshold seemed like a very low priority but has consumed a great deal of staff and Planning Board time. He preferred that Packet Page 118 of 124 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 15 planning staff work on green building codes, incentives for development based on energy efficiency, preservation of view corridors, etc. He did not support the repeal of environmental safeties to facilitate development which is what this sounded like to him. He did not support eliminating environmental policy procedures for an entire class of development in the name of economic development. Because Highway 99 and the Medical Activity Center are economic development zones did not mean they should be exempt from environmental protections. He preferred the entire City be subject to SEPA review. Council President Bernheim expressed concern that this amount of work had been done with only one presentation to the Community Services/Development Services Committee and no request for guidance from the Committee. The only City Council involvement following the presentation to the Committee was the presentation staff provided in July. He did not want the Planning Board to view this as another effort on which the Council did not act. He did not want the message to be that the Council was interested in promoting economic development by repealing environmental regulations. He acknowledged many of the technical updates were non-controversial. Councilmember Plunkett agreed the motive for the proposal was as Councilmember Wilson described but in this case the Planning Board got it wrong. He would have preferred the Planning Board bring the policy issue of whether to increase the SEPA threshold to the Council prior to providing a recommendation on the updates for consistency along with a change in the policy. That would have achieved both objectives, 1) the technical update, and 2) determining whether the Council was interested in pursuing an increase in the SEPA threshold. Councilmember Petso suggested staff return the proposal to the Council with the technical corrections and without the change in the flexible thresholds. Mr. Lien clarified the Council was not interested in repealing the 500 cubic yards that has applied throughout the City for 25 years, only the Activity Center and the Highway 99 corridor. Councilmember Petso agreed, expressing her intent to leave the policy thresholds as they are and make the other technical updates to better conform to the model ordinance. She was not proposing a change to the grading threshold. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ASK STAFF TO BRING BACK THE SEPA UPDATES WITHOUT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FLEXIBLE THRESHOLD. Councilmember Peterson concurred with Councilmember Wilson’s explanation that direction for this review came from the Council as a result of the Levy Review Committee’s recommendation and the formation of an Economic Development Commission. The Council has told staff and citizen groups to look for positive economic development efforts. He emphasized the zoning would not change under the proposal to increase the SEPA threshold; SEPA is a minor part of a development proposal. As an environmentalist, he supports SEPA but wants to ensure citizens are aware that it is the development code and zoning that protects single family neighborhoods, not SEPA. He recalled the proposal by the Kruger Clinic would have required an extensive review; SEPA review would not have prevented that development. He clarified neither staff, the Planning Board nor the Council was interested in radically changing policy; the policy is in the zoning code and development code, not in the SEPA regulations. He expressed his support for the motion. Councilmember Plunkett clarified he did not mean that the Planning Board should not explore things, he was suggesting the process was wrong when major policy changes did not come to the Council first before the Planning Board spent time on it. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Packet Page 119 of 124 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 16 Councilmember Wilson suggested redefining the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center as part of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan docket. He recalled the overwhelming lesson at the time of the Kruger Clinic’s proposal was that the Medical Activity Center was poorly defined which created conflicts between the City’s vision for the area and how it was described in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Petso suggested the Community Services/Development Services Committee discuss a Comprehensive Plan amendment at their next meeting and return to Council with a plan of action. Mr. Snyder suggested a motion to docket review of the language and limits of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center in next year’s Comprehensive Plan amendment. Councilmember Wilson clarified the Council could docket a proposed question without an answer to the question. Mr. Snyder answered yes, explaining it kept all the options open. Councilmembers Peterson and Petso expressed support for docketing review of the language and limits of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO PLACE REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCKET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, reiterated her question, how the ferry system plans to spend $26 million in Edmonds and why the eight elected officials in Edmonds do not know how those funds will be spent. She suspected the reason elected officials did not know the answer was because the elected officials have never asked the ferry system that question; the email Mr. Clifton sent to the ferry system stated Ms. Shippen was asking the question. The ferry system’s response has been the funds are a placeholder. Next, she asserted the City had never asked the ferry system what one improvement project would be built with the $26 million. She urged the Mayor and Council to ask the ferry system what the $26 million would be spent on. To the comment that this is far in the future, she pointed out the project would be built in 19 years, and the ferry system must know what the project is. She objected to the suggestion to appeal to the legislature with regard to this issue, anticipating they would have little interest. She assumed the project was a second slip at the main street terminal and planned to pursue discussion of the second slip and the Edmonds Crossing “crackpot scheme.” Barbara Tipton, Edmonds, Steering Committee Member of the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Project, spoke in favor of the ordinance to create a Citizens Tree Board. Last April, Edmonds received Community Wildlife Habitat certification from the National Wildlife Federation following nearly two years of dedicated work by Laura and Paul Spehar and a committee with the support of 191 residential property owners, 5 schools and 19 parks and green zone managers who registered their properties as backyard wildlife habitats. The Tree Board will engage in several sub-projects that include, 1) developing a tree ordinance designed to preserve and protect existing trees and encourage planting of additional trees, 2) increasing community outreach and education regarding the value of trees, proper selection of trees and current methods of planting and carrying for trees, 3) working with citizen groups to organize invasive plant removal and native vegetation planting in conjunction with the Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, 4) sponsoring an annual Arbor Day event, 5) working toward achievement of Tree City USA status. Meetings will be open to the public and minutes will be filed with the City Clerk’s Office. Dr. Richard Senderoff and she met with Planning Manager Rob Chave and Parks Director Brian McIntosh who reviewed and provided input on the ordinance. The ordinance has also been reviewed by the City Attorney Scott Snyder. Once the ordinance to create the Tree Board is approved by the Council, the Mayor’s office will prepare a press release seeking applicants for the Tree Board. She encouraged all interested parties to apply. Packet Page 120 of 124 AM-4318   Item #: 9. City Council Meeting Date: 11/01/2011 Time:15 Minutes   Submitted By:Robert English Department:Engineering Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action  Information Subject Title Resolution declaring an emergency and waiving public bidding requirements; approve contract with Strider Construction for utility connection at Main Street and Railroad Avenue. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the Resolution, authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Strider Construction and appropriate $130,500 from the 412 Water Utility Fund to complete the utility connection work.  Previous Council Action None. Narrative The City signed a construction contract with Interwest Construction in March, 2010 to provide new City utility connections under current and future BNSF trackage where Railroad Avenue intersects both Dayton and Main streets. The City attempted to complete this work in the summer of 2010.  Wood debris was encountered during the storm pipe boring efforts underneath the railroad tracks at Main Street which prevented the Interwest from completing the storm pipe installation. The water main work was also abandoned when subsequent exploratory efforts indicated buried wood obstructions in the vicinity of that work as well.  The City was approached by BNSF the first week of October, 2011 regarding their intention to complete the utility work not finished by the City in 2010. They were able to identify a funding source that could be used to complete these crossings if the work is completed by year-end 2011. The railroad desires to complete these utility crossings in conjunction with a planned track repair at Main Street. The track and utility work will take place during November, 2011. BNSF will complete the crossings under the railroad tracks and within the BNSF right of way but will not hook up these new crossing pipes to the City’s system. The City must do that. It is just a question of when and at what cost. The water main crossing being replaced is cast iron and was installed in the 1930’s. It is already well beyond any reasonable life expectancy. City staff is concerned that extensive construction work which has occurred near this pipe over the last few years and the vibrations from the BNSF tracks have produced conditions not conducive to a longer service life. This pipe also carries some of the highest pressures we have in our system. When cast iron pipe does fail it does so in a characteristically spectacular fashion. This would not be a good location for a failure of this type. We would like to see this crossing completed Packet Page 121 of 124 sooner rather than later. The City has requested and received a quote from Strider Construction, the BNSF contractor for the crossing work, to complete the connections to the City system at the same time.  The City received a not to exceed price of $95,536.88 which includes all equipment and labor necessary to hook up the crossing pipes to the City’s systems. It is highly advantageous to the City to complete this work in conjunction with the BNSF work. All of the additional expense of mobilization, traffic control, trains, Washington State Ferries, Community Transit and local business impacts are being paid for by the railroad so the City will not have to incur any of those expenses if all the work is done now rather than waiting until next year. In addition to approximately $50,000 in cost savings to the City we will save Brackett’s Landing patrons, Ferry passengers, and downtown businesses considerable inconvenience, delays, and parking interruption by doing this work under the umbrella of the BNSF project. Finally, doing this work now will help prevent the possible failure of the water main that could have severe effects on city infrastructure with costs to the citizens in emergency clean up costs. The contractor can also take advantage of the low tides at night. The work must be completed during low tides. If we waited until Spring, 2012 the work would likely need to be done during the day when disruption is most acute. Staff requests a management reserve of $35,000 to address additional construction costs if unforeseen conditions are encountered during excavation and installation activities and to pay for contract inspection, survey and material testing services.  The total appropriation requested is $130,500 and the project costs will be paid by the 412 Water Utility Fund.   Attachments Resolution  Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 10/27/2011 05:59 PM Public Works Phil Williams 10/28/2011 08:49 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 08:58 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 10/28/2011 10:07 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/28/2011 10:20 AM Form Started By: Robert English Started On: 10/27/2011 03:40 PM Final Approval Date: 10/28/2011  Packet Page 122 of 124 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND STAFF TO WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH STRIDER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. TO CONNECT PUBLIC UTILITIES AT MAIN STREET AND RAILROAD AVENUE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BNSF’S MAIN STREET TRACK REPAIR. _____________________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, based upon the presentation of staff and the information contained in the public record, the City Council finds that the need to coordinate the reconnection of public utilities at Main Street and Railroad Avenue during the construction by BNSF of the Main Street Track Repair, constitutes an emergency within the meaning of RCW 39.04.280(1); and WHEREAS, RCW 39.04.280(1) authorizes the City to waive competitive bidding requirements in the event of an emergency; and WHEREAS, an emergency is defined by RCW 39.04.280(3) to mean an unforeseen circumstance beyond the control of the municipality that either: (a) presents a real immediate danger to the proper performance of an essential function; or (b) will likely result in material loss or damage to property, bodily injury or loss of life if immediate action is not taken; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the staff report of the Public Works Director and staff describing the need to coordinate the reconnection of public utilities during the construction by BNSF of the Main Street Track Repair; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and concludes that the immediate restoration of city utility systems on Main Street and Railroad Avenue by Strider Construction Co., Inc. through negotiation rather than competitive bidding or selection is in the public interest, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The Edmonds City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and his designees to waive competitive bidding requirements in order to contract with Strider Construction Co., Inc. for the reconnection of public utilities on Main Street and Railroad Avenue during the construction by BNSF of the Main Street Track Repair. RESOLVED this _____ day of November, 2011. APPROVED: ________________________________ MAYOR, Mike Cooper Packet Page 123 of 124 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: _____________________________________ CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Page 124 of 124