2012.08.28 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers ~ Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
AUGUST 28, 2012
Work Session
6:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER
1.(75 Minutes)Convene in executive session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).
7:15 P.M. - RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION / FLAG SALUTE
2.(5 Minutes)Approval of Agenda
3.(5 Minutes)Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A.Roll Call
B.AM-5085 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of August 21, 2012.
C.AM-5083 Approval of claim checks #133824 through #133952 dated August 23, 2012 for
$638,586.89.
4.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public
Hearings
5.(15 Minutes)
AM-5086
Report on bids opened August 27, 2012 for the Main Street Decorative Lighting and
Sidewalk Enhancements Project (5th Ave to 6th Ave) and possible award of a
construction contract.
6.(20 Minutes)
AM-5082
Permitting fees for solar installations.
7.(60 Minutes)Discussion regarding taking minutes/notes during executive sessions.
Packet Page Page 1 of 98
7.(60 Minutes)
AM-4999
Discussion regarding taking minutes/notes during executive sessions.
8.(15 Minutes)Report on outside committee/board meetings.
9.(5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
10.(15 Minutes)Council Comments
ADJOURN
Packet Page Page 2 of 98
AM-5085 3. B.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:08/28/2012
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 August 21, 2012.
Recommendation
Review and approval.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Attachments
08-21-12 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Mayor Dave Earling 08/24/2012 08:12 AM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 08/24/2012 08:30 AM
Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 08/23/2012 05:16 PM
Final Approval Date: 08/24/2012
Packet Page Page 3 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
August 21, 2012
The Edmonds City Council Meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Strom Peterson, Council President
Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember
Joan Bloom, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Lora Petso, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
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
Rob Chave, Interim Dev. Serv. Director
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(i)(iii).
At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding
potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)(iii). 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. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials
present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Yamamoto, Johnson, Fraley-
Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Bloom. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday,
Planner Kernen Lien, Public Works Director Phil Williams, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive
session concluded at 6:58 p.m.
Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:01 p.m. and led the flag salute.
Mayor Earling announced the Council had not had time to discuss a labor matter during the executive
session and may add an executive session at the end of tonight’s agenda.
2. MEET WITH CANDIDATE FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD
At 7:03 p.m., Mayor Earling explained the City Council will next meet with Planning Board candidate Ian
Duncan for approximately 15 minutes. The meeting took place in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the
Public Safety Complex and was open to the public. All Councilmembers were present for the meeting
with Mr. Duncan.
The City Council Meeting was reconvened at 7:17 p.m.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER, ADDING A
POTENTIAL EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS AS AGENDA
ITEM 16. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Packet Page Page 4 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 2
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Buckshnis requested Item J be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember
Petso requested Item N be removed.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 14, 2012.
C. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT & CHECKS #51593 THROUGH #51625
FOR $475,737.42 AND BENEFIT CHECKS #51626 THROUGH #51634 & WIRE
PAYMENTS FOR $124,333.88 FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2012 THROUGH
AUGUST 15, 2012.
D. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #133691 THROUGH #133823 DATED AUGUST 16,
2013 FOR $362,327.33 AND REPLACEMENT CHECKS #133763 FOR $3,259.01 AND
#133803 FOR $952.90.
E. INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY BOAT
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND
SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #1.
F. AUTHORIZATION TO SELL ONE (1) 2002 DODGE STRATUS.
G. AUTHORIZATION TO SELL UNIT 047-STR (1973 ASPHALT TACK WAGON).
H. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES G. MURPHY AUCTIONEERS TO
SELL SURPLUS CITY VEHICLES.
I. BANKING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.
K. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT #2 WITH
DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES FOR THE 76TH AVE. W @ 212TH ST. SW
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
L. APPROVAL OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, ADMINISTRATIVE SETTLEMENT AND
APPRAISAL WAIVER PROCEDURES ON FEDERAL-AID PROJECTS.
M. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE LIFT STATION 2
REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT.
O. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JULY 31, 2012 FOR THE A-BASIN UPGRADE PROJECT
AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MOON CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. ($174,530.96
INCLUDING SALES TAX).
P. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED AUGUST 2, 2012 FOR THE BUILDING ROOF
REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KRUGER SHEET
METAL ($344,925 INCLUDING SALES TAX).
Q. AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO NORTHSHORE
PAVING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,251.23 FOR THE 2012 WATERLINE
OVERLAY PROJECT.
Packet Page Page 5 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 3
R. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO APPROVE ACCEPTANCE AND RECORDING
OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENTS.
S. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 2
WITH PARAMETRIX, INC. FOR THE MAIN ST. DECORATIVE LIGHTING AND
SIDEWALK ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT.
T. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED AUGUST 9, 2012 FOR THE LIFT STATION
REHABILITATION PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO RAZZ
CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,872,095.20.
U. AUTHORIZATION TO APPROVE EASEMENTS FOR THE SEWER LIFT STATION
REHABILITATION PROJECT.
V. RENEW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORDINATOR POSITION WITH THE CITY OF
MILL CREEK.
W. CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF IAN DUNCAN TO THE
PLANNING BOARD.
ITEM J: 2011 FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT REPORT - STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE.
Councilmember Buckshnis stated she pulled this item in order to commend Finance Director Shawn
Hunstock on the audit. Although there has been controversy among citizens regarding the City’s financial
policies, this is a new administration and a new Finance Director and improved transparency. The audit
was nearly perfect with the only comments related to categorization of expenses.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PETERSON, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM J. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM N: AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH
OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT (OVWSD) TO INSTALL
SEWERLINE AND ASSOCIATED APPURTENANCES AS PART OF THE 224TH ST. SW
SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT.
Councilmember Petso pulled this item so that she could abstain from the vote.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM N. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1),
COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINING.
5. INSURANCE BRIEFING FROM WASHINGTON CITIES INSURANCE AUTHORITY (WCIA).
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock introduced Lisa Roberts, Risk Services Manager, WCIA. Ms.
Roberts has been with WCIA for six years and has been in the public risk management industry for
twenty years. He advised that Ms. Roberts will not be able to comment on specific claims or litigation
during her presentation.
Ms. Roberts explained WCIA is the City’s insurer; WCIA is not an insurance company, it is a self-
insurance pool. WCIA was created in 1981 with only 9 Puget Sound area cities and has since grown to
153 members throughout Washington; Edmonds joined WCIA in 1985. WCIA was formed during the
hard insurance market in the 1980s when many governmental agencies could not obtain insurance and
those who could found their premiums had increased substantially. Public entities were a poor risk at that
Packet Page Page 6 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 4
time as they did little in terms of risk management and began having a lot of claims. RCWs 48.62 and
39.34 provides oversight for interlocal agency pools.
Ms. Roberts explained WCIA’s philosophies differ from an insurance company. WCIA has a board that
operates the pool; each of WCIA’s 153 members is a full voting member of the pool. She displayed and
described an organizational chart of WCIA’s governing body. The full board meets three times a year and
the board determines coverage. WCIA does not rely on the insurance industry for much of their financial
strength; only about 12%. WCIA believes in creating good case law through aggressive litigation and
provides tailored risk management services to its members. The Executive Committee is elected from the
full board. Members can participate in one of the committees (Long Range Planning, Budget, Loss
Control, Investment and Audit).WCIA anticipates and responds to members’ needs quickly; for example,
following 9/11, members wanted terrorism coverage. WCIA enacted terrorism coverage long before the
federal government enacted the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA).
WCIA is the strongest pool in the state financially with over $165 million in total assets; $32.5 million in
assessments from members to cover property and liability risks, $83 million in reserve, and a $4.5 million
administrative budget. WCIA has a 99% confidence level, the strongest in the state for any self-insurance
pool and probably in the nation.
Part of the reason WCIA has been so successful is their national award-winning training program called
the COMPACT. All members are required to meet organizational elements to be in compliance with the
COMPACT; members who are not in compliance are penalized 7% of their insurance premium. The
COMPACT provides a systematic method of delivering risk management services and training that helps
reduce losses. Each member must attend three annual trainings. Trainings are free and located throughout
the state or the trainer will come to the member’s location. Each member is subjected to an annual audit
and review. WCIA staff works with the member’s staff on whatever topic is being audited that year; the
audit topics are determined by the Long Range Planning Committee. This year’s topic is cyber liability,
last year’s topic was employment. The topic the year before was police. Each member then has a year to
come into compliance with mandatory requirements. Each City Attorney must attend WCIA training; they
provide City Attorney training at the Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys conferences
in the spring and fall or they can attend any of the WCIA trainings. All members are encouraged to pay
their assessments on time.
WCIA’s administrative budget includes their legal consultation program and member services program
and pre-defense program. WCIA trained over 6,000 employees last year at over 281 sites. WCIA has 9
designated risk management professionals that can meet with the membership; each city has a risk
management representative assigned to their city. Edmonds’ risk management representative is Debbie
Sellers.
Another of WCIA’s philosophies is aggressive litigation. If a member does something wrong and is
negligent, that claim is paid quickly and fairly. If the member did not feel they did anything wrong and
the adjuster agrees and the facts of the case are worth fighting for, WCIA will litigate it. She cited
examples such as a Bainbridge Island case that provided shoreline management enforcement for the city
that took nine years to win. WCIA also won a class action lawsuit filed against Spokane police. WCIA
has won at the 9th Circuit Court and U.S. Supreme Court. She noted many plaintiffs choose not to file
frivolous lawsuits when they learn WCIA is the insurer.
WCIA has defense costs of approximately $6 million annually. WCIA has total liability limits of $20
million in coverage on an occurrence basis; there are some supplements for certain types of lawsuits. An
occurrence basis is important for elected officials; because errors and omissions coverage is occurrence
based, once a Councilmember has completed his/her term in office, claims filed during their tenure will
be covered.
Packet Page Page 7 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 5
WCIA handles approximately 1500 claims annually; 300 cases are pending at any given time. WCIA has
an aggressive pre-defense program, typically used for land use and employment. WCIA also offers a free
legal consultation program to review personnel policies, land use ordinances, etc. The most important
thing WCIA does that differs from an insurance company is to look for coverage, not exclusions.
Ms. Roberts referred to the City of Edmonds’ loss severity report for 2007-2011, commenting the City’s
assessment was not based solely on this information. The report shows the average for the group and
claims WCIA paid for Edmonds during 2007-2001. Edmonds is in the second to largest group of cities
(Group 3 – medium sized cities, 200,000 – 400,000 annual worker hours). She reviewed the report,
pointing out Edmonds has had some higher losses in police and Public Works sewer and street. She
recognized Edmonds is an older city with older infrastructure.
Ms. Roberts displayed a comparison of the group cost per worker hour 2007-2011. The average cost per
worker hour is $0.45; Edmonds is slightly above at $0.51. She explained the cost per worker hour was the
total cost to the pool including defense costs, reserves, indemnity reserves and actual indemnity claims.
WCIA caps members’ assessments; one large claim does not necessarily drive up a city’s assessment. A
large number of claims will drive up a member’s assessment.
Ms. Roberts described Council exposures that can be problematic. Land use can be very problematic and
verdicts can be outrageously expensive. She referred to the Westmark v. City of Burien case on which
WCIA paid a $10 million verdict on a SEPA permit application issue. She applauded Edmonds for the
use of a Hearing Examiner, noting the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine can be problematic for Councils
in quasi judicial matters. WCIA supports the use of a Hearing Examiner, an impartial body. WCIA also
supports having appeals to Superior Court. WCIA placed a $5 million cap on land use exposure. Most
WCIA members have moved to a Hearing Examiner and appeals to Superior Court.
An area of exposure for cities is moratoriums on adult sex shops. There were two Federal District Court
decisions that rendered summary judgments against Bothell and Kenmore, stating their moratoriums were
illegal due to constitutional issues. If the City did not have zoning for adult sex shops, she encouraged the
City to work with the City Attorney and not to enact a moratorium while doing so.
Another area that Councils have exposure is personnel. There have been numerous claims for wrongful
termination and discrimination in recent years. Often Councils are confused regarding their role in that
process. She emphasized the Council is the legislative branch that makes policy and the Mayor is
responsible for day-to-day operations and controls over staff. When Councilmembers are on the dais, they
have legislative immunity. When not on the dais, Councilmembers have no immunity or power and may
not have coverage if acting outside their scope. She encouraged the Council to understand their role, and
use the chain of command.
Another area of exposure for Councilmembers is leaking executive session information. There are few
exceptions to the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA); executive sessions must be related topics allowed
to be discussed in executive session such as real estate, litigation and personnel. It is important that
information provided in executive session not be disclosed outside an executive session. Any conflicts
should be aired and the Councilmember should recuse themselves before going into executive session.
WCIA wants to share their defense strategy with the Council but will not if they feel their ability to
defend the City will be compromised. There are sanctions for leaking executive session information;
Councilmembers who leaked executive session information have been sanctioned, required to pay a $500
fine, make a public apology and have not been reelected. WCIA recommends cities have an ethics
ordinance and a resolution to ensure due process. Malfeasance or misfeasance can be a reason for recall.
Ms. Roberts cautioned Councilmembers from taking matters into their own hands. She referred to one of
the stories in the vignettes provided in the Council packet where a Councilmember who was passionate
about a park land purchase and who blazed a trailhead on the property when the process was taking too
Packet Page Page 8 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 6
long. The city was then required to purchase the land and pay for the taking the Councilmember created.
Another Councilmember who disagreed with the city’s strategy, waived his attorney-client privilege by
sharing the written defense strategy provided in executive session to the plaintiff’s attorney. That
Councilmember was sanctioned, required to pay a fine and was not reelected. She summarized
Councilmembers did not have the ability to individually waive their attorney-client privilege; that must be
done by the Council as a whole.
Ms. Roberts cautioned Councilmembers from responding to requests from the public such as for a sign,
guardrail, etc. during the public comment portion of a Council meeting. Such requests should be referred
to staff for study, input and response. She also cautioned Councilmembers against making general
comments that assure, promise or guarantee such as “we’ve had that problem all over the city, or “I told
them this would happen,” or “we meant to fix that problem,” or “don’t worry, this will never happen
again.”
Ms. Roberts commented the “E” in email stands for “evidence.” This is an area WCIA is seeing more
problems in and there have been instances when an employee’s or Councilmembers’ personal computers
used for work were subpoenaed. She emphasized everything a Councilmember writes is a public record.
She recommended that before writing, Councilmembers ask themselves if they would like to have it
published in the newspaper or be an exhibit in a lawsuit. She encouraged Councilmembers to use their
City issued email address and not use their personal computer. This helps with Councilmember’s
protection as well as with public record retention. She also cautioned Councilmembers not to
communicate to each other while on the dais. She relayed a story where a Councilmember’s texts with his
girlfriend during an open Council meeting were revealed via a public records request.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the keeping of minutes, notes or audio recording of executive
sessions and whether any other cities kept minutes, notes, or audio recordings of executive session. Ms.
Roberts relayed WCIA’s position is they prefer cities not keep minutes, notes or audio recordings of
executive sessions. The reason a Council is in executive session is the topic being discussed is an
exception to the OPMA and executive session notes have the potential to be disclosed via public records
requests. She was not aware of any cities that kept minutes, notes or audio recordings of executive
sessions.
Councilmember Johnson asked what the audit question will be for next year. Ms. Roberts answered it is
cyber liability and social media.
Councilmember Johnson asked about Council serving in a quasi judicial role on land use appeals. Ms.
Roberts explained the area WCIA has seen the most expensive claims is a well-meaning City Council that
unintentionally violates someone’s rights of due process. Hearing Examiners are typically land use
attorneys who know how to hold hearings and avoid violating the public’s rights. Councilmembers have
opinions and like to share those opinions with their constituents. Many cities who have gone to a Hearing
Examiner system like it better because Councilmembers are able to express their opinion rather than not
talking to citizens on quasi judicial issues. Over the past 15 years, land use has become a very technical,
expensive exposure for cities.
Councilmember Johnson asked about cities with a Hearing Examiner that use City Council for appeals.
Ms. Roberts answered there are cities that do that. There is still exposure if something is done wrong in
the process. It usually takes a Council a while to get comfortable with the Hearing Examiner process
before they are willing to have appeals go to Superior Court.
Councilmember Bloom asked Ms. Roberts to review the loss severity report. Ms. Roberts explained the
loss severity is the amount of money spent on claims in Edmonds 2007-2011 for each area compared to
the group average. Edmonds is in actuarial Group 3, 200,000-400,000 annual worker hours. There are five
actuarial groups:
Packet Page Page 9 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 7
1. Cities under 100,000 annual worker hours
2. Cities with 100,000-200,000 annual worker hours
3. Cities with 200,000-400,000 annual worker hours
4. Cities with 400,000+ annual worker hours
5. Special districts (911 centers, fire districts, etc.)
Edmonds losses as well as the group’s losses help drive the City’s assessment. Cities with high losses get
peer pressure from other cities in their group. Edmonds’ losses are slightly above the average; Edmonds is
the fifth highest city in the group for losses paid 2007-2011. She referred to the loss severity chart
commenting police claims could have been constitutional issues or auto accidents. From the police bar on
the chart to the right are finite things such as sewer, street, etc. From the police bar on the chart to the left
typically are constitutional issues that are more expensive to defend. She noted the chart does not
illustrate whether WCIA prevailed or lost, only the amount WCIA paid out 2007-2011. She summarized
Edmonds’ loss profile is not bad for five years; WCIA’s biggest loss area is sewer. One large loss will not
affect the City’s assessment; frequent losses will potentially increase a member’s assessment.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, announced Snohomish County Council will hold a public hearing at 10:30 a.m.
on September 5 regarding construction of a large cargo freighter operations facility at the Snohomish
County Airport. Next, Mr. Rutledge reported Mountlake Terrace staff defeated City staff in a softball
game. Mr. Rutledge also reported on the effort to acquire federal funds for a project on Lake Ballinger.
Dave Page, Edmonds, complimented Ms. Roberts on the report she provided. With regard to the
proposed retail only in the BD1 zone, he commented although retail only sounds like a great idea, it has
the potential to impede on someone’s rights, which could subject the City to paying just compensation
under the constitution. He referred to the City’s enactment 15 years ago of a $50 permit to cut a tree in
excess of 3 inches in diameter; that ordinance was modeled after a Phoenix, Arizona, ordinance where
there are no trees compared to alders in this area that grow 3 inches in one year. He suggested the
Planning Board, Architectural Design Board and City Council take a land use course. He recalled the
Council has made some huge land use decisions on appeal in the past five years which according to the
WCIA may not be the safest thing for the Council to do.
Don Hall, Edmonds, expressed support for retail only in the BD1 zone. Breaks in retail storefronts and
uninteresting windows cause pedestrians to stop walking which causes retailers at the end of the block to
lose customers. Retail only would send a strong message to people seeking to establish a new store or
branch as well as existing retailers that the City cares about retail in the BD1 zone.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to a good example of chipsealing on 175th in Shoreline from
approximately I-5 to 15th Avenue NE. He explained chipsealing is covering the road with tar and gravel to
create a new surface. He suggested any Councilmember interested in further information and the cost to
contact Shoreline. He did not think Edmonds Public Works was interested in chipsealing.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, asked what drives WCIA’s attendance in executive session and is WCIA
considered part of the governing body or does the governing body invite them to attend executive sessions
in certain situations. MRSC states executive sessions are comprised of the governing body and entities or
individuals that the City Council invites. He questioned how the City Council could invite people to
executive session as that would require a quorum of the Council. Possibly the Council President can
invite people to executive session. WCIA is not a part of the governing body and is a separate entity with
their own motivation and guidelines that may not be consistent with the City’s best interests. WCIA is
primarily concerned with the best interests of the pool. He asked the impact on the attorney-client
privilege status of the executive session when WCIA attends an executive session. If WCIA is not part of
Packet Page Page 10 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 8
the governing body, he asked how the City can redact the related executive session meeting minutes
under attorney-client privilege.
Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, pointed out only two of the seated Councilmembers were on the Council in
January 2010 when the decision to have Hearing Examiner appeals heard by the City Council was made
and for one of the two, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, it was her first meeting and the decision was
made at 11:00 p.m. He suggested the Council reconsider that decision, recalling the WCIA representative
recommended the Council not serve in that role. Of the five Hearing Examiner appeals in the past several
years that came to the Council, the only decision that was reversed was in favor of a developer.
Councilmembers may think they are benefiting citizens by hearing appeals but in actuality there are far
more dangers than benefits.
7. UPDATE ON BUDGET FORECAST
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock explained the General Fund forecast included in the 2012 budget
document, adopted by Council on November 22, 2011, projected a deficit of $813,151 for 2013 (page 6 of
the budget). The projection showed Ending Fund Balance becoming close to negative at the end of 2016.
“Ending Fund Balance” on the forecast included money in the General Fund – 001, as well as the $1.9
million in the Emergency Financial Reserve Fund – 006. He displayed the Executive Summary – Current
Forecast, Changes in Fund Balance (Revised), highlighting the actual Ending Fund Balance 2010 and
Estimate 2011 is $6,855,108.
Mr. Hunstock explained subsequent to the budget adoption in November 2011, several items have had an
impact on the City’s 2012 and later budgets:
• The City stopped receiving liquor excise taxes on July 1, 2012. The lost revenue is estimated to
be $211,000 annually.
• PERS employer retirement contribution rates are expected to increase by more than 25% effective
July 1, 2013. The impact will be $180,000 annually.
• The State Supreme Court implemented new rules regarding indigent defense (public defender)
caseload limits. These new limits become effective July 1, 2013. It is estimated this will at least
double the cost of public defender services. The impact in 2013 is estimated to be at least
$134,000.
• The State is expecting a surcharge of up to 19% on employer L&I disability rates in order to
replenish the Disability Fund. The impact is estimated to be $56,000 annually.
• Budget amendments adopted during 2012 are expected to impact 2013 and future budgets by
approximately $100,000 per year. These include the Human Resources Department
reorganization and membership in the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County ($5,000). The
future year impact of the Human Resources reorganization is estimated to be $93,000.
Mr. Hunstock emphasized of the above five items, the City has no control over the first four. The above
items increase the deficit from $813,151 in 2013 to approximately $1.5 million.
Mr. Hunstock displayed an updated financial forecast that incorporates the above items. He highlighted
the deficit projected in 2013 of $1.5 million. The revised projections show the City’s reserves being
depleted in early 2016. The old and new projections do not include the $1.3 million from the sale of fire
assets. The addition of this amount would mean about a 4-6 month difference in when the City’s reserves
are depleted (the reserve depletion would move from early 2016 to the third quarter of 2016). The revised
projections do not yet include the effect of any departmental budget reductions for 2013, the Voluntary
Separation Program, or any changes in health insurance plans or co-pays.
The City’s expenses are still projected to grow faster than increases in revenue. The $1.5 million deficit
currently projected for 2013 will grow over time. In order to begin to address the structural issues in the
Packet Page Page 11 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 9
City’s budget, the administration is considering addressing an additional $400,000 in cost savings, in
addition to the $1.5 million deficit for 2013. It is expected if the City moves to Budgeting by Priorities for
the 2014 budget, the Council, Mayor, department heads and the public will perform a comprehensive
review of where and how the City allocates its resources and whether the allocations are meeting the
needs of the citizens of Edmonds.
Mayor Earling commented when he took office, the projected deficit was $800,000; due to the state
directives, the deficit has increased substantially. He anticipated a number of long meetings to reduce the
budget by $1.5 million and hopefully find another $400,000 to address the long term structural problem.
He planned to have an op-ed out in the next few days regarding this subject to make the public aware that
the problem has accelerated due in part to decisions made by the State and the State Supreme Court.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the reserve fund that will include the $1.9 million Emergency
Reserve and the $1.3 million from the sale of fire assets. Mr. Hunstock explained the budget amendment
associated with the reserve policy (Agenda Item 9) consolidates the $1.9 million and $1.3 million and $2
million from the General Fund into one reserve. He clarified the accounting change does not change the
dollars, only how they are accounted for and grouped together. The 2011 financial statements show a
General Fund ending fund balance of $9.5 million. That amount is made up of General Fund 001, the $1.9
million in Fund 006 and the $1.3 million in Fund 010 and a couple other funds. The reserve policy does
not change that in any way.
For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Hunstock explained implementation of the 16% reserve target is
consistent with recommended best practices by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).
Councilmember Buckshnis commented Ellensburg has a 17% reserve, Mukilteo has 22% and Redmond
has 24%.
Councilmember Petso asked if good financial news such as savings from bond refinancing or lower
WCIA premiums were included in the current forecast. Mr. Hunstock answered the updated forecast does
not include many of the items that will ultimately be included in the 2013 budget that will be presented to
the Council in October. Unfortunately there has not been a lot of good news but to the extent possible
they will be incorporated. He anticipated the savings from bond refinancing to be approximately
$20,000/year for 9 years.
Councilmember Petso asked whether there was benefit in considering a multi-jurisdictional court rather
than the City having its own court, noting in the past the Municipal Court did a lot of things to cover
expenses such as issuing passports, etc. but those revenues are diminishing. Mr. Hunstock agreed
potential cost savings as well as known and unintended consequences should be analyzed.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what items were included in “Services” under Expenses. Mr.
Hunstock answered it included a number of professional services including the City Attorney, Public
Defender, Prosecuting Attorney, etc.
Councilmember Bloom inquired whether the $93,000 Mr. Hunstock cited for the Human Resources
Department reorganization was a cost savings. Mr. Hunstock answered it was cost increase as a result of
the reorganization. Interim Human Resources/Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained at the
end of 2011 the Council cut $150,000 in the Human Resources budget for the director’s salary and tasked
the Mayor with reorganizing the Human Resources Department. The reorganization added approximately
$90,000; the net savings is approximately $60,000.
8. JUNE 2012 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock explained the fund balance of the General Fund increased during the
second quarter by $2.7 million which is historically consistent with the receipt of the first half of property
Packet Page Page 12 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 10
taxes during the second quarter. Year-to-date the City has a $219,000 surplus. He explained the $9.56
million General Fund fund balance ties to the audited financial statements and includes the $1.3 million
and $1.9 million reserves in addition to a couple smaller funds. He referred to Revenues by Fund –
Summary (page 6 of packet) that illustrates General Fund revenues are at 52% of budget, expenditures are
at 51% and REET 1 revenue is at 54% of budget.
Mr. Hunstock reviewed the Change in Fund Balance – Summary (page 8 of packet) and Revenues -
General Fund (page 9-10). He reviewed Expenditure by Fund – Detail (page 13), highlighting salaries and
wages at 47% of budget and overtime is at 43% of budget. He pointed out debt service payments on GO
bonds are made in December. He reviewed Expenditures – General Fund – by Department in Summary,
pointing out every department is below budget.
Mr. Hunstock thanked Finance Committee Members Buckshnis and Yamamoto for their patience with the
changes he has made to the report over the past several months. He planned to make other changes with
the goal of making the report more useful for the Council as decision makers. He invited feedback from
Councilmembers to improve the report.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about revenue projections from the fiber optics program. Mr.
Hunstock answered budgeted revenue for fiber optics is included in the General Fund. It is a fairly small
amount. CTAC has identified the need for a business/marketing plan for the fiber program.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
9. ORDINANCE – 2012 AUGUST BUDGET AMENDMENT.
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock reviewed the budget amendment for the Main Street project,
explaining it reflects three previously unknown funding sources for that project: $500,000 in State grants
as well as contributions from the Water and Stormwater Utility funds for their portion of the utility
upgrades in the project.
Mr. Hunstock referred to the budget amendment to establish the Contingency Reserve Policy. He
explained the Finance Committee considered a draft reserve policy at their December 13, 2011 meeting.
The consensus at that time was the draft policy was too complicated with too many reserve funds and the
policy should be simplified. At their July 10, 2012 meeting, the Finance Committee considered a revised
draft reserve policy that proposed creation of one overall reserve fund with a target of 16% of annual
General Fund revenues or approximately $5.3 million as well as a smaller reserve fund with a target of
2% General Fund revenue or approximately $660,000 to be used for claims and litigation. During both the
July 10 Finance Committee meeting and the July 17 City Council meeting, the plan was a future budget
amendment to fund the 16% target with the $1.9 Emergency Financial Reserve Fund, $1.3 million from
the sale of fire assets and an additional transfer of approximately $2 million from the General Fund. It
was also mentioned during those meetings that the smaller 2% Risk Management Reserve Fund would be
funded from interfund transfers from the LID funds as well as future year-end General Fund budget
surpluses. It was recognized that the new reserve policy would replace the previous restriction on the $1.9
million Emergency Financial Reserve Fund. Both the December 2011 and July 2012 Finance Committee
meetings and the July 17 City Council meeting were public meetings during which public comment was
available.
Mr. Hunstock explained the proposed budget amendment moves the $1.9 million from the Emergency
Financial Reserve Fund, the $1.3 million from the sale of fire assets and approximately $2 million from
the General Fund into a single, consolidated Contingency Reserve Fund in order to meet the target of 16%
in the reserve policy adopted by Council at the July 17 meeting.
Packet Page Page 13 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 11
A budget amendment approved by Council at the July 17 meeting created the Risk Management Reserve
Fund and transferred $244,000 from the LID Guarantee Fund to the newly created Risk Management
Reserve Fund. The $244,000 partially funds the 2% target of approximately $660,000. The reserve policy
adopted by Council states in Section 5.2 that the end of 2014 is the target for fully funding the Risk
Management Reserve Fund.
To clarify information that has been incorrectly stated elsewhere, Mr. Hunstock assured there is no plan at
this time to move any of the reserve funds beyond what is intended to be accomplished with this budget
amendment. The budget amendment accomplishes the transfer in of money into the Contingency Reserve
Fund; the ordinance does not include an appropriation to use or move those reserve funds. An
appropriation is the legal authority granted by Council to spend or transfer money from specific funds up
to specified dollar amounts. An appropriation can only occur during budget adoption at a City Council
meeting during which a public hearing occurs or through a budget amendment at a City Council meeting
during which public comments can be provided. Absent such an appropriation, any use or movement of
the money would be a violation of State law as well as the City’s budget ordinance appropriating money
into specific funds. Without such an appropriation to use or transfer the money, it simply remains in the
fund gaining investment income over time.
Speaking for Mayor Earling, Mr. Hunstock explained the preliminary 2013 budget that will be presented
to the Council in October will not include the use of reserve funds. Every effort is being made at this time
to not only present a balanced budget for 2013 without the use of reserve funds but possibly make a dent
into future deficits that are anticipated with the updated financial projections. A balanced budget for 2013
with the currently projected deficit of $1.5 million will only occur with significant reductions in the
budget and resulting service level impacts for the City and residents.
Council President Peterson clarified the only way Council could access the funds in the Contingency
Reserve Fund would be via a budget amendment. Mr. Hunstock agreed the funds cannot legally be used
without an appropriation which can only occur with adoption of the budget or a budget amendment.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it would be irresponsible for Councilmembers to tap into the
reserves; the City needs to have a reserve fund. Edmonds’ 16% target is somewhat low; Ellensburg has
17%, Mukilteo has 22% and Redmond has 24%.
Councilmember Bloom asked why the name of the reserve fund was changed and why the funds were
combined, noting there seems to be a perception that there is a difference between an emergency reserve
and a contingency reserve. Mr. Hunstock explained consolidating the reserve funds increases
accountability and transparency. Previously there were reserve funds in two different funds and part of a
third fund, the General Fund. The fund name has no legal force of use. The reserve policy adopted by
Council in July 2012 specifically mentions types of emergencies including natural disaster but does not
limit the use to only those purposes. He reiterated the funds cannot be used without an appropriation by
the Council.
Councilmember Bloom asked if there were more options for using funds in the Contingency Reserve
Fund versus the Emergency Reserve Fund. Mr. Hunstock answered only due to the restriction that
previously existed on the $1.9 million which was effectively eliminated by Council adoption of the new
reserve policy. City Attorney Jeff Taraday stated the reserve policy includes reference to RCW
35A.33.145 and 146 that refer to contingency funds. Those sections contain the legal framework for a
contingency fund.
Councilmember Bloom inquired about the plan to fully fund the Risk Management Reserve Fund by the
end of 2014. Mr. Hunstock responded the reserve policy establishes a target of 2% by the end of 2014.
There is no definite plan for establishing that target. He would have concern with moving more than the
$2 million proposed in the budget amendment into the Contingency Reserve as it would leave a
Packet Page Page 14 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 12
significantly smaller ending fund balance in the General Fund. He wanted to ensure there were sufficient
funds in the General Fund to meet ongoing operating needs. Transferring $2 million from the General
Fund into the Contingency Reserve leaves a $3.8 million fund balance in the General Fund.
Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding that it did not make any difference what the reserve
fund was called; there was money available for a catastrophic event. Mr. Hunstock answered the total
dollar amount available for emergencies has not changed; the $1.9 million, $1.3 million and some of the
fund balance of the General Fund that is considered to be reserve were combined into one single fund.
The overall dollars have not changed; they are simply accounted for in fewer funds.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 3893 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3891 AS A RESULT OF
UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, CREATING A
NEW CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND.
Council President Peterson explained one of the reasons for creating an emergency reserve fund was to
establish a percentage of monies to set aside. With the adoption of the new reserve policy, he is
comfortable with renaming the fund Contingency Reserve Fund because it clarifies the funds are set aside
for catastrophic occurrences or other emergencies. Tonight’s action implements the reserve policy the
Council adopted in July.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. SAVINGS FROM REFINANCING OF GO BONDS
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock reviewed savings from refinancing GO bonds:
Bond
Issue
Savings General
Fund
001
Street
111
Storm
411
Parks Acq
126
WWTP
414
Edmonds
PFD
1998 $28,097.22 12.35%
$3,470.01
7.07%
$1,985.07
7.07%
$1,985.07
73.52%
$20,657.08
2001A $244,671.29 83.58%
$204,496.26
16.42%
440,175.03
2001B $112.654.07 100%
$112,654.07
2002 13.64%
$139,173.94
86.36%
$881,162.88
Total $1,405,759.40
Total Savings by Fund $207,966.27 $1,985.07 $1,985.07 $272,485.09 $40,175.03 $881,162.88
Mr. Hunstock referred to savings by fund, explaining the life of each bond varies. He pointed out in
theory the savings in the PFD bond would accrue to the PFD, in actuality over the short term it will
essentially decrease the potential loan from the City to the PFD related to the debt service.
Mr. Hunstock referred to a calendar in the packet related to the bond refinancing. The ordinances related
to refinancing of revenue bonds and refinancing of these GO bonds was approved by Council in
December 2011. This will be a competitive bond sale. He explained the difference between a negotiated
and competitive bond sale; in a negotiated bond sale the City works with one underwriter and one
financial adviser to negotiate the terms of the bond and they sell the bonds. In a competitive bond sale
there are numerous underwriters and buyers and the bonds are marketed to get the best interest rate
Packet Page Page 15 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 13
possible. This increases borrowing costs somewhat but the rate in a competitive bond sale more than
outweighs the higher cost.
Mr. Hunstock reviewed the Summary of Refunding Results, explaining there is a total par value of
approximately $9.9 million. As long as the refinancing is under $10 million, bank qualified bonds can be
issued which are earlier to market on the open market as well as have an interest rate discount, resulting in
approximately ¼% less in debt service costs. As rates change, the par value may also change; every effort
will be made to keep the total under $10 million.
Mr. Hunstock reviewed the Summary of Refunding Results for each bond issue, explaining the goal is a
minimum savings of 2½ -3%; that percentage is significantly higher for most of the bond issues. The only
exception is the 1998 bonds although savings will still be achieved. That bond issue may be pulled to
keep the par value under $10 million.
Mr. Hunstock referred to the 2011B bond issues which relate to the Marina Beach improvements. In
November/December 2011, the Council discussed lengthening the term of the bonds to free up additional
REET funds. The refinancing and extension to 2031 accomplishes an $112,000 savings as well as
$90,000/year in REET funds for debt service. All the other bonds are refinanced for the original length of
the bond issue.
Mr. Hunstock referred to the $244,671.29 in savings from refinancing the 2011A bonds, the
approximately $27,000 - $30,000 year in savings will accrue to the General Fund. The new, lower debt
service savings will be incorporated into future budgets. He referred to the $1,020,336 savings for
refinancing of the 2002 PFD bonds; he explained some of the savings accrue to the Parks Acquisition 126
($139,000), the remainder accrues to the PFD.
Councilmember Johnson inquired about the City’s bond rating. Mr. Hunstock answered the City regularly
goes through a bond review with Moody’s Investment Services; the City maintained its existing bond
rating which is reflected in the CAFR. Councilmember Johnson asked the City’s bonding capacity. Mr.
Hunstock answered that is also in the CAFR; the City has a great deal of capacity.
Mr. Hunstock explained the savings identified in December 2011 were approximately $868,000; by
waiting until now rates have decreased which increased the savings to $1.4 million.
11. DISCUSSION REGARDING RETAIL ONLY ZONE IN BD1.
Interim Development Services Manager Rob Chave reviewed the Planning Board’s recommendation:
• Restrict uses in the designated street front in the BD1 zone to retail or service uses and prohibit
office/professional office used from the street front of the building
• No restriction behind or above the designated street front
He displayed a map of downtown, identifying the BD1 zone (the retail core approximately 2 blocks north,
south, east and west of the fountain at 5th & Main) and the designated street fronts.
Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained his comments were in
regard to why consideration should be given to restricting and promoting certain uses within the first 45
feet of a structure located within a BD1 zone. This issue is being raised in part from past conversations
with some leasing agents, other cities as well as implementing Goal 2, Policy 2i of the Edmonds
Economic Development Plan which states: “Create synergy for commercial businesses where possible,
for example, by implementing a “retail core” area in the downtown.” If there is no requirement to fill
spaces with certain uses, there is little incentive/motivation to search for the types of activities or
businesses that would help increase the drawing power of the central area commercial retail sector. In
Packet Page Page 16 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 14
other words, it can sometimes be easier to lease to a tenant that will not add to the commercial vitality of
the retail/restaurant/art gallery/boutique/service business core.
Downtown land use goals and strategies for many downtown areas incorporate four prominent themes:
(1) central gathering place, (2) sense of place, (3) connectivity, and (4) density. To achieve these
objectives, downtowns need economic development/vitality, safety, housing/businesses, and tourism; a
vibrant retail/service core helps advance these goals and reach overall downtown success.
Retail/Restaurants/Service Uses, particularly independently owned, adds to the Edmonds’ distinctiveness
because it is the most visible element within the downtown core of Edmonds. He referred to a June 21,
2010 email he sent to downtown property owner Jonathan Mayo, “Edmonds’ unique downtown character
is defined by the diversity and concentration of complimentary commercial uses such as restaurants/cafes,
art galleries, house wares, books, garden supplies, specialty boutiques, hair/nail salons, wellness
businesses, etc. These uses generate pedestrian activity and a lively social environment that, in turn,
sustain a mix of uses. Creation of a critical mass of this type of activity also helps to increase the drawing
power of the central area commercial retail sector. While purely office uses have the ability and flexibility
to open in more locations within commercial areas, uses such as retail stores, restaurants, art galleries,
etc., have limited business spaces/stock and thrive best when there is a concentration of similar uses. The
City and business community have been working to attract businesses that will help bring life to the City's
downtown streets during the weekend and evening hours and it’s starting to pay off.
A healthy retail core is also important for maintaining safe streets in many central cities. According to
Crime Prevention through Environmental Design guidelines (CEPTED), businesses on the ground floor
provide “eyes on the street” and deter criminal activity. Retail, restaurants, art galleries, etc., stay open for
longer periods of time than office uses, thus providing more activity on the street beyond 5 or 6 p.m.
Retail/restaurants/galleries/service uses can also help stimulate housing and business development within
downtown areas as they often provide essential services to city residents. This can be partially attributed
to the vibrancy that these uses add to downtown streets.
A strong retail/restaurant/gallery/service core helps attract shoppers and tourists. Tourists invest
significant amounts of money into many City, County and State economies and tourism is the 4th largest
industry in Washington. Tourism in turn supports businesses and their employees. Downtown Edmonds is
home to many independent retailers and restaurants, so when tourists are shopping downtown, they are
supporting the growth of smaller independent businesses. Conversely, negative fluctuations in the retail
market, e.g., absence of a critical mass, can result in vacant storefronts thus affecting the street
environment and eventually weakening the vitality of the downtown core. Therefore, retail/service issues
are not just retail/service issues – they are a critical part of sustaining the health of the downtowns.
Kirkland limits uses at street level to certain kinds of commercial uses throughout the downtown area, but
in the core area of downtown Kirkland, the list of allowed uses narrows for business spaces fronting Park
Lane and Lake Street. This works very well and occupancy rates are quite high. Other cities with these
types of provisions include Escondido, Encinitas, etc.
To a question that has been asked about allowing the market to decide, Mr. Clifton pointed out adoption
of zoning standards related to uses, setbacks, height limits, etc. means the market is not allowed to decide.
He summarized the uses proposed to be restricted in the BD1 are strictly office uses such as accounting,
insurance, pure banking uses, architectural, engineering, etc.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about banking and real estate offices. Mr. Clifton responded the
proposal would allow banking and real estate offices; a customer makes somewhat of a purchase when
they visit a bank or real estate office compared to an architectural, engineering or accounting office which
are by appointment or a pure office use.
Packet Page Page 17 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 15
Councilmember Buckshnis asked how many offices would be affected. Mr. Clifton responded Planning
Board Members Valerie Stewart and Kristiana Johnson inventoried downtown businesses. The Public
Works, Planning, and Parks Committee discussed re-inventorying downtown businesses. Councilmember
Buckshnis asked how existing offices in the BD1 zone would be affected. Mr. Clifton answered the
proposal would include maintaining existing nonconforming regulations (Chapter 17.40.010). Under the
proposal, within the first six months, a landlord could fill the space with a similar office use, after six
months the landlord would be required to replace it with a use that was allowed under the amended
zoning code.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about buildings whose architecture was not conducive to retail. Mr.
Clifton answered that issue was raised by the Public Works, Planning, and Parks Committee and could
potentially be discussed further.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked staff’s expectation of the Council tonight. Mr. Clifton wanted to know
if the Council was interested in pursuing this further and if so, staff will conduct further investigation to
provide additional information. There were three primary concerns raised at yesterday’s Public Works,
Planning, and Parks Committee meeting:
• What are the proposed boundaries of a zone that would restrict office uses? The initial intent was
to include the entire BD1 zone. A question was raised by Councilmember Fraley Monillas
whether this area could/should be reduced to extend only 1 block either side of the fountain at 5th
Avenue and Main Street.
• More clearly define what would be allowed and not allowed in a retail only/commercial core. He
contacted the City of Kirkland again and researched other cities and agreed that it would be
helpful to develop a more specific list of what would and would not be allowed under this
proposal. This would help with the administration of the code as well as provide more clear
guidance for landlords or business owners.
• Grandfathering or how long is the proposed period before a landlord has to conform to amended
language? Within the first six months, a landlord could fill the space with a similar office use,
after six months the landlord would be required to replace it with a use that was allowed under the
amended zoning code.
Councilmember Buckshnis viewed an accountant as a service the same as a nail salon.
Councilmember Yamamoto assumed the boundary was only one block in each direction from the fountain
as that was primarily the downtown core. Mr. Clifton agreed that could be considered; the original
proposal was the entire BD1 zone.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas found this an interesting idea and her understanding was that the
businesses in the area and the building owners did not object to the proposal. Her primary concerns were
grandfathering existing businesses and allowing a landlord to rent to another office use within the first six
months an office use ceased. She questioned the difference between banking or real estate and a
stockbroker or other service. She commented downtown building owners were currently not prohibited
from renting to whomever they wished. Mr. Clifton agreed as long as it was an allowed use. Because the
City does not have a policy related to retail only, he currently encourages landlords to fill spaces within
the core with uses that will add vitality and liveliness and that stay open later than an office use.
Councilmember Petso relayed her concern with structures that are not suitable for retail, indicating she
has other concerns that she will forward to staff. She suggested the Economic Development Commission
(EDC) and the Planning Board consider this. Mr. Clifton advised this was already reviewed by the EDC
and Planning Board.
Packet Page Page 18 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 16
Councilmember Bloom commented the amendment is titled retail only but the uses being considered are
nail salons, banks, real estate, etc. She suggested the definition not be retail only but a prohibition on
offices. Mr. Clifton agreed this proposal was about the uses that would not be allowed.
Councilmember Bloom asked who and how property owners and/or businesses were surveyed and how
the conclusion was reached that they were all supportive of the proposed change. Mr. Clifton responded
not all property owners were surveyed. His conversations with a few major property owners indicated
they were supportive. Councilmember Bloom recalled one of the reasons this amendment was delayed
was to ensure property owners and tenants were supportive of the proposal. Mr. Clifton commented more
outreach could be done as part of the EDC process. Councilmember Bloom shared other
Councilmembers’ concern with buildings in the BD1 zone that are not suitable for retail.
Councilmember Johnson recalled the EDC and Planning Board discussed this issue approximately a year
ago. She referred to the Planning Board’s recommendation to prohibit drive-through services in the BD1
zone. She recalled one of the questions at that time was what services would be allowed and how
appropriate services would be determined. She recommended this issue be remanded to the Planning
Board and EDC for further discussion along with additional research by staff.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO REFER THIS ISSUE TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO LOOK AT RETAIL ONLY IN THE BD1 ZONE FURTHER,
SPECIFICALLY SERVICE USES, AND ANY OTHER RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY FEEL ARE
APPROPRIATE.
As this had been considered by the EDC and Planning Board previously, Council President Peterson
preferred it be referred to only the EDC. This has been before the Council previously and is the Council’s
decision to make. One of the reasons it has been before the Council a number of times is to ensure
property and business owners were aware of the proposal; there has not been a huge outcry from property
or business owners.
Councilmember Johnson relayed she has been involved in the discussion at both the EDC and Planning
Board. The EDC has approximately 50% new members and the Planning Board is well versed on the
subject. She suggested a joint EDC/Planning Board meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO HAVE THIS ISSUE CONSIDERED AT A JOINT
MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO.
THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PETERSON VOTING NO.
It was the consensus of the Council to move the executive session regarding labor negotiations to next
week prior to the City Council meeting.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 45 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
12. DISCUSSION REGARDING STEP-BACKS
Interim Development Services Director Rob Chave explained explained the difference between a setback
and step-backs; a setback is the entire building is set back a distance from the property line; a step-back is
a portion of the building is stepped back at a certain height, providing a notch in the building. In most of
Packet Page Page 19 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 17
the BD zones, there is a 15-foot step-back requirement at 25 feet for a maximum building height of 30
feet above the average grade. That provision was inserted in approximately 2006, until that time the
height limit was 30 feet with pitched roof or modulated building façade. No buildings have been
constructed using the step-back regulations. Step-backs are not required in the BD1 zone.
He relayed the Planning Board’s recommendation:
• Eliminate the step-back requirement in the downtown BD zones
Mr. Chave displayed a map identifying the BD1 zone (downtown core), BD2 zone (surrounding the retail
core), BD3 (auto oriented retail uses south up 5th Avenue), BD 4 (contains a substantial number of
residential uses) and BD5 (along 4th Avenue). The step-back requirement allows building height to be
increased from 25 feet to 30 feet. He displayed photographs of traditional commercial building styles,
pointing out there are a variety of ornamentation and detail but they have a common pedestrian scale
street front.
He provided photographs of historic downtown Edmonds buildings, pointing out there are no setbacks or
step-backs. He highlighted the false front on the Chanterelle building to create a block presence at the
street front. He identified the location of a 15-foot step-back at 25-feet on the Chanterelle building, noting
that requirement would make it difficult to reproduce historic downtown buildings. He provided
photographic examples of pedestrian street fronts, commenting the upper stories are less obvious to
pedestrians, they notice the street level. The Comprehensive Plan contains design objectives related to
downtown site design, building form, building facades, etc. He suggested revisiting the design objectives.
Councilmember Petso relayed the Public Works, Planning, and Parks Committee discussed her perception
that the amendment as drafted resulted in a 5-foot building height increase for most of the BD2 – BD5
because the language is a 25-foot height plus an additional 5 feet with a step-back. She suggested
removing the building height issue and focusing on the step-back language by redrafting the amendment
so that it eliminated the step-back and the extra 5 feet. Mr. Chave answered if the Council wanted a 25-
foot building height, the height discussion could be eliminated. A 25-foot building would be lower than
the City has had in the past; the building height has essentially been 30 feet. The Chanterelle building is
approximately 30 feet. Lowering the building height to 25 feet may eliminate some historical options.
One option would be a 30-foot height limit with design parameters to achieve 30 feet.
Councilmember Petso recalled the Public Works, Planning and Parks Committee discussed alternatives to
the 15-foot step-back such as reducing the size of the step-back, stepping back the entire floor or making
the additional 5-foot height dependent on something other than the step-back. Mr. Chave answered there
are many options such as allowing a 30-foot building height but with more specificity regarding the street
front at the pedestrian level. He referred to drawings and diagrams provided by Mr. Hinshaw that could
be reintroduced into the design guidelines to provide more clarity.
Councilmember Petso referred to Comprehensive Plan general objectives, observing not all of them
would be required for a single development. Mr. Chave answered some are worded as shall, others are
encouraged. They apply to any proposal in the downtown area and are part of the criteria that downtown
building designs are viewed against. The design review chapter in the code refers to the design objectives
in the Downtown Waterfront Plan.
Councilmember Petso asked whether the City could be sued for applying guidelines that use words such
as minimize, optimize or improve. Mr. Chave answered application of the guidelines is defensible.
Councilmember Yamamoto noted existing height limits already limit development downtown and
limiting building heights to 25 feet would further limit development. Developers need to have the
Packet Page Page 20 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 18
opportunity to propose a building with 30-foot height limit; that cannot be done with the current step-
back.
Councilmember Buckshnis did not object to eliminating the required step-back. She disagreed with
Councilmember Petso that it was an increase in the building height as the building height was already 30
feet. She suggested language that states the overall building height in the BD1 – 4 zones is a maximum of
30 feet. Mr. Chave agreed that was an option. He agreed essentially the building height was 30 feet now;
the code describes what happens between 25 feet and 30 feet. Developers have a right to a 30-foot
building height as long as they meet the requirements.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the 15-foot step-back was a change in the architectural design. Mr.
Chave commented height is a surrogate for design in discussions in Edmonds; height is a poor arbiter of
design and does not automatically result in good design. It provides a certain scale but not necessarily a
desirable streetscape. The 30-foot building height has worked reasonably well but the 30-foot buildings
that have been constructed have not always been what the community wanted. A number of revisions
were made to the code in 2006 to encourage viable building design for a pedestrian environment. He
noted historic buildings do not have a step-back.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented requiring a step-back would change the architectural design of
buildings. Mr. Chave commented step-backs are typically required on much taller buildings to reduce the
apparent mass of the building.
Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding was the building height was 25+5 in the BD zones and
the +5 feet could be achieve with modulation and now with a step-back. In the BD1 zone, a 15-foot
ground floor was required to achieve a 30 foot building height which she noted that precludes three
stories. Mr. Chave answered it would depend on topography.
Councilmember Bloom agreed with Councilmember Petso that eliminating the step-back would allow a
30-foot building without modulation or step-back. Recognizing citizens’ sensitivity regarding building
heights, she suggested a public hearing.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Committee discussed a 5-foot step back. Mr. Chave offered
to provide photographs of buildings with a 5-foot step-back. Typically 5-foot step-backs are at the 4-5
story level to make the lower portion of the building more prominent. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
recalled discussion regarding step-backs at Firdale Village. Mr. Chave explained step-backs at Firdale
Village were intended to provide a reduction in building mass adjacent to residential. The Planning
Board’s concern with a 15-foot step-back downtown was it would make residential uses on upper stories
very challenging on narrow lots.
Councilmember Petso clarified she viewed this as a height increase because the existing code states the
base height is 25 feet; a developer can construct a 25-foot box without a step-back or pitched roof. The
code as proposed would allow a 30-foot box without a step-back or modulated roof which she equated to
a height increase. She preferred to develop options for achieving a 30 foot building height.
Councilmember Petso expressed concern with the language for the BD5 zone if the step-back requirement
were removed. Mr. Chave agreed the BD5 zone is unique and establishing a historic corridor will require
the involvement of the Historic Preservation Commission. Councilmember Petso recommended
beginning that process along with this amendment. Mr. Chave answered that was a long term process that
will require a great deal of public input, workshops, etc.
For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Mr. Chave offered to return with drawings and language for
increasing building heights in BD zones from 25 to 30 feet to reinforce the pedestrian scale. He also
Packet Page Page 21 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 19
offered to provide photographs of 5-foot step-back. He asked whether the intent was to review that
information at a full Council work session.
Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Mr. Chave providing the information at a Council work session.
She supported including language regarding building architecture. Mr. Chave pointed out in 2005 a
developer could build a 30-foot box with a modulated façade. He referred to examples such as the 3rd &
Bell building that was constructed under those regulations.
Councilmember Petso preferred this be referred to the Planning Board.
Councilmember Johnson commented when this was first presented to the Planning Board, it was one of
four items that were considered together. The fourth item, performance standards, is scheduled for the
September 25 Council meeting. She suggested combining this discussion with the discussion on
September 25. She recalled the Planning Board unanimously found the 15-foot step-back not
architecturally desirable but there was no discussion regarding building heights. Mr. Chave responded a
September work session would be acceptable to staff.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO THE SEPTEMBER 25 WORK SESSION.
Council President Peterson agreed this discussion dovetails with development agreements; however,
when the previous items were on the same Council agenda, the Council requested they be separated. City
Attorney Jeff Taraday is preparing a white paper on development agreements and incentive zoning.
Council President Peterson preferred the two topics not be combined. The September 25 Council meeting
already includes a one hour budget review and a one hour discussion regarding incentive zoning.
Mayor Earling suggested delaying this discussion until the end of October. Council President Peterson
suggested September 18.
Councilmember Johnson commented it would be more productive to have the incentive zoning discussion
occur prior to the 25-foot versus 30-foot building height discussion. As the code currently exists,
additional building height can be achieved via a step-back; there may be other tradeoffs that are more
desirable.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS WITHDREW HER MOTION WITH THE
AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
YAMAMOTO, TO DISCUSS STEP-BACKS ON SEPTEMBER 18 AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENTS/INCENTIVE ZONING ON SEPTEMBER 25.
Councilmember Petso preferred to delay the discussion to October 23 or the fifth Tuesday, October 30.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas preferred to discuss development agreements prior to removing the 15-
foot step-back requirement
Councilmember Johnson asked Mr. Taraday to describe the white paper he is preparing for the September
25 presentation regarding incentive zoning. Mr. Taraday stated his office is preparing a memo that will
explain terminology in more detail. When the Council has discussed development agreements, it appeared
what the Council really wanted was incentive zoning. The Council wants to allow flexibility in
development regulations in exchange for a developer providing certain types of public benefits.
Packet Page Page 22 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 20
UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS
YAMAMOTO AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, BLOOM, PETSO AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM,
TO MOVE THE DISCUSSION REGARDING STEP-BACKS TO OCTOBER 2. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
13. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF AUGUST 14, 2012
Finance Committee
Councilmember Buckshnis reported the majority of items discussed by the Committee were approved on
the Consent Agenda or discussed by the Council tonight. Public comment addressed the reserve policy,
REET revenue and the WCIA presentation.
Public Works, Parks, and Planning Committee
Councilmember Petso reported most agenda items were on tonight’s Consent Agenda. The Committee
discussed whether the City is interested in subsidizing solar panel projects by waiving the permit fee; that
item is scheduled for full Council discussion. At yesterday’s meeting, the Committee discussed retail only
in BD1 and step-backs; the Committee did not provide a recommendation to Council.
Public Safety and Personnel Committee
Councilmember Bloom reported the Committee discussed renewal of the Domestic Violence Coordinator
Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mill Creek which was approved on the Consent Agenda. The
Domestic Violence Coordinator, Kari Hovorka, works 19 hour/week, divided 2/3 to Edmonds and 1/3 to
Mill Creek. She and Councilmember Johnson were impressed with the amount of work done by Ms.
Hovorka.
14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling reported students from Hekinan, Japan, visited Edmonds this week. He found the students
to be extremely polite and full of energy. He recognized Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite, her
staff and the Sister Cities Commission for organizing the event, and the families who hosted students.
Mayor Earling referred to trees cut last week on the hillside below Pt. Edwards. An arborist report was
due today. Trees were definitely cut and there may be fines imposed or replanting required.
Mayor Earling referred to yesterday’s Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee meeting, noting
committee meetings are intended to be two Councilmembers; four Councilmembers attended yesterday’s
meeting. Although it was legal to have four Councilmembers attend because the meeting was noticed, he
expressed concern with what appeared to be a robust discussion between four Councilmembers that
excluded three Councilmembers. He encouraged the Council to avoid that situation in the future,
preferring to have full Council discussion occur at a regular Council meeting.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas responded the two Councilmembers who do not serve on the Committee
were allowed to provide input as was staff and the guest but Councilmember Petso and she tried to limit
discussion. She questioned what could have been done differently other than ask one of the
Councilmembers to leave. Mayor Earling answered that option should have been considered.
Packet Page Page 23 of 98
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 21, 2012
Page 21
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Yamamoto commented there will be a softball rematch with Mountlake Terrace next
year. He thanked Todd Court, Recreation Manager, for organizing that game.
Councilmember Bloom explained she was one of the Councilmembers who attended the Public Works,
Parks and Planning Committee meeting and appreciated the opportunity to learn more about the two
issues. She is the only member of Council who was not on the EDC, Planning Board or on the Council
when these issues were discussed previously. She felt Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did an excellent
job ensuring the discussion stayed on track. Mayor Earling reiterated if four Councilmembers attended, it
should have been advertised as a full Council meeting.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was good for Councilmember Bloom to attend the Public
Works, Parks and Planning Committee meeting because she was not part of the previous discussions
regarding step-backs.
Councilmember Johnson announced the Planning Board is having a special workshop on Wednesday,
August 22 to discuss Harbor Square. The meeting will be recorded and broadcast on Channels 21 and 39
beginning Saturday at 9:00 a.m.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported she has attended other committee meetings where four
Councilmembers were in attendance. She reported the Edmonds Special Olympics Masters Team won the
silver medal this week; Shoreline won the gold medal.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the reggae band, Adrian Xavier, that performed at City Park
last Sunday. The last Concert in the Park is this Sunday, 3:00 – 4:00 p.m. at City Park. She thanked City
Clerk Sandy Chase for organizing the special Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee meeting.
16. POTENTIAL EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
This item was moved to next week prior to the City Council meeting.
17. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m.
Packet Page Page 24 of 98
AM-5083 3. C.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:08/28/2012
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 #133824 through #133952 dated August 23, 2012 for $638,586.89.
Recommendation
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:2012
Revenue:
Expenditure:638,586.89
Fiscal Impact:
Claims $638,586.89
Attachments
claim cks 08-23-12
Project Numbers 08-23-12
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Finance Shawn Hunstock 08/23/2012 08:41 AM
City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/23/2012 08:46 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 08/23/2012 10:04 AM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 08/23/2012 05:17 PM
Packet Page Page 25 of 98
Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 08/23/2012 08:09 AM
Final Approval Date: 08/23/2012
Packet Page Page 26 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133824 8/17/2012 069120 AST CAPITAL TRUST COMPANY Mebt 8/20/12 MEBT 08-20-12 PAYROLL
August 20, 2012 MEBT less Gerry Gannon
811.000.000.231.520.000.00 77,036.13
Total :77,036.13
133825 8/23/2012 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC CR18742 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.00 130.00
Total :130.00
133826 8/23/2012 074143 AFFORDABLE WA BACKFLOW TESTING 3386 BACKFLOW TEST REPORTS
BACKFLOW TESTS
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 1,380.00
Total :1,380.00
133827 8/23/2012 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 0197-001492517 3-0197-001492517
RECYCLE ROLLOFF
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 12.64
Total :12.64
133828 8/23/2012 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 15574 HAINES WHARF PARK PLAQUES
HAINES WHARF PARK PLAQUES
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,410.00
Freight
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 28.60
9.5% Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 136.67
Total :1,575.27
133829 8/23/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6344255 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 42.85
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 4.07
Total :46.92
1Page:
Packet Page Page 27 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133830 8/23/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6344262 21580001
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 57.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 5.46
Total :62.96
133831 8/23/2012 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0334200-IN 01-7500014
DIESEL FUEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 6,060.21
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 575.71
Total :6,635.92
133832 8/23/2012 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0334748-IN Fleet - Regular Unleaded 11,100 Gal
Fleet - Regular Unleaded 11,100 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 35,402.34
WA St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 4,440.33
WA St Svc Fees
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 50.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 4.75
Total :39,897.42
133833 8/23/2012 001777 AURORA PLUMBING & ELECTRIC D24333 Water- Supplies
Water- Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.94
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.37
Total :4.31
133834 8/23/2012 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 65974 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area #100 printing
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 90.10
UB Outsourcing area #100 printing
2Page:
Packet Page Page 28 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133834 8/23/2012 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 90.10
UB Outsourcing area #100 printing
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 92.82
UB Outsourcing area #100 postage
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 302.55
UB Outsourcing area #100 postage
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 302.54
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 8.56
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 8.56
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 8.82
Total :904.05
133835 8/23/2012 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST Sept 2012 AWC SEPTEMBER 2012 AWC PREMIUMS
09-12 fire pension premiums
617.000.510.522.200.230.00 4,011.32
09-12 retirees premiums
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 30,064.63
09-12 AWC Premiums
811.000.000.231.510.000.00 273,040.44
Total :307,116.39
133836 8/23/2012 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 4626 E2GA.SERVICES THRU 7/20/12
E2GA.Services thru 7/20/12
412.300.630.594.320.410.00 490.77
E2GA.Services thru 7/20/12
411.000.656.538.800.410.00 587.85
Total :1,078.62
133837 8/23/2012 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 943352 INV 943352 EDMONDS PD
GOLD EP LETTERS (PAIR) -CAMERON
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 17.95
EMBROIDERED NAMETAG -CAMERON
3Page:
Packet Page Page 29 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133837 8/23/2012 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 29.70
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.53
INV 950550 EDMONDS PD -SUPPLIES950550
48" HOBBLE, FLAT WEBBING
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 74.75
TRANZPORT SPIT HOODS
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 49.75
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 11.83
INV 951888 MILLS - EDMONDS PD951888
SEW NAMETAG ON SHIRTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 6.00
SEW SERVICE BARS ON SHIRTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 0.95
INV 952855 EDMONDS PD -HAWLEY952855
SEW CHEVRONS - 4 JUMPSUITS
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 10.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 2.07
4 PAIRS CORPORAL CHEVRONS
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 11.80
Total :223.33
133838 8/23/2012 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 14174921 142519
ODOR SCRUBBER EVALUATION
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 298.00
Total :298.00
133839 8/23/2012 072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE 1033484 E7AA.E9GA.WWTP.BID ADVERTISING
E7AA.E9GA.Bid Advertising
112.200.630.595.330.410.00 127.50
E7AA.E9GA.Bid Advertising
4Page:
Packet Page Page 30 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133839 8/23/2012 (Continued)072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE
412.300.630.594.320.410.00 448.75
E7AA.E9GA.Bid Advertising
411.000.656.538.800.440.00 45.00
Total :621.25
133840 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080235 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 001-0572105
Finance dept copier contract charge
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 249.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 23.75
Total :273.74
133841 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080236 COPIER LEASE
COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.574.100.450.00 273.74
COPIER LEASE12080240
COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.574.100.450.00 30.65
COPIER LEASE12081756
PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 36.16
Total :340.55
133842 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080229 CANON CONTRACT CHARGE IRC1030
Canon contract charge for IRC1030
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 9.36
Canon contract charge for IRC1030
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 9.36
Canon contract charge for IRC1030
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 9.27
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 0.89
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 0.89
9.5% Sales Tax
5Page:
Packet Page Page 31 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133842 8/23/2012 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 0.88
Total :30.65
133843 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080234 LEASE CITY CLERK'S COPIER
Lease City Clerk's Copier
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 466.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 44.36
RECEPTIONIST DESK COPIER LEASE12080237
Recept. desk copier lease
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 20.11
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 1.91
Total :533.35
133844 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12081753 FLEET COPIER
Fleet Copier
511.000.657.548.680.450.00 33.02
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.450.00 3.14
PW ADMIN COPIER12081754
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
001.000.650.519.910.450.00 68.55
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
111.000.653.542.900.450.00 38.85
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
411.000.652.542.900.450.00 38.85
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
411.000.654.534.800.450.00 27.42
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 27.42
PW Office Copier for 8/1-8/31/12
511.000.657.548.680.450.00 27.41
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.450.00 6.51
6Page:
Packet Page Page 32 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133844 8/23/2012 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.450.00 3.69
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.450.00 3.69
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.450.00 2.61
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 2.61
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.450.00 2.59
WATER SEWER COPIER12081755
Water Sewer Copier
411.000.654.534.800.450.00 70.68
Water Sewer Copier
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 70.68
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.450.00 6.72
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 6.71
Total :441.15
133845 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080228 Lease Council Office copier/printer
Lease Council Office copier/printer
001.000.110.511.100.450.00 30.65
Total :30.65
133846 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080238 Lease copier/printer Planning Div.
Lease copier/printer Planning Div.
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 36.16
Lease Bldg copier/printer12080239
Lease Bldg copier/printer
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 36.16
Total :72.32
133847 8/23/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12080233 INV 12080233 CUST # 572105 EDMONDS PD
7Page:
Packet Page Page 33 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133847 8/23/2012 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
LEASE CHARGE - 4 COPIERS
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 581.60
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 55.25
Total :636.85
133848 8/23/2012 074137 CARPENTER, RHONDA CARPENTER0821 REFUND
REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 68.00
Total :68.00
133849 8/23/2012 068484 CEMEX LLC 9424338837 Water - Asphalt
Water - Asphalt
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 175.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 16.63
Total :191.63
133850 8/23/2012 074142 CITRIX SYSTEMS INC 91317594 CITRIX SERVER LICENSES
Citrix XenServer Enterprise Edition -
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 1,531.78
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 145.53
Total :1,677.31
133851 8/23/2012 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I12002368 Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis
Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 1,134.00
Total :1,134.00
133852 8/23/2012 069892 COLUMBIA FORD INC 3-C889 V249 Unit EQ87WQ 2012 Ford 86A Transit XL Van
Unit EQ87WQ 2012 Ford 86A Transit XL Van
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 20,731.00
8.2% Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 1,716.34
8Page:
Packet Page Page 34 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :22,447.34133852 8/23/2012 069892 069892 COLUMBIA FORD INC
133853 8/23/2012 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3265530 BANKING SERVICES RFP
Banking Services RFP 8/16/12
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 34.85
Total :34.85
133854 8/23/2012 074146 DANIEL & SUSAN DAPPER 1-37206 #611033796-KK UTILITY REFUND
#611033796-KK Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 72.93
Total :72.93
133855 8/23/2012 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2012070340 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0
Scan Services for July 2012
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 940.00
Total :940.00
133856 8/23/2012 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2012070027 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0
Adobe Acrobat 10 Professional Win
001.000.230.512.500.490.00 193.16
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.230.512.500.490.00 18.35
Total :211.51
133857 8/23/2012 006635 DEPT OF LICENSING 312 000 093 001 0007 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS LICENSERENEWAL
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK RENEWAL
411.000.656.538.800.510.00 169.00
Total :169.00
133858 8/23/2012 074067 DREISBACH, ELIZABETH DREISBACH0826 CITY PARK CONCERT
CITY PARK CONCERT:BALLARD SEDENTARY
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 700.00
Total :700.00
133859 8/23/2012 068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL 12-13418 Water Quality - Water Samples
Water Quality - Water Samples
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 1,024.00
9Page:
Packet Page Page 35 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,024.00133859 8/23/2012 068292 068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL
133860 8/23/2012 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 14019 CEMETERY SUPPLIES
CEMETERY SUPPLIES
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 33.38
9.5% Sales Tax
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 3.17
Total :36.55
133861 8/23/2012 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP BRIGGS0814 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPS
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPS FOR MOLLIA AND
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 118.00
Total :118.00
133862 8/23/2012 008550 EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT #15 1001101043 PRINTING OF SWIM VOUCHERS
PRINTING OF 3RD GRADE SWIM VOUCHERS
001.000.640.575.510.490.00 298.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.510.490.00 28.32
Total :326.44
133863 8/23/2012 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 4-34080 LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH PL SW
LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH PL SW
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.57
Total :29.57
133864 8/23/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 42693A 1 COPIER AND PRINTER FOR FRONT COUNTER
COPIER AND PRINTER FOR FRONT COUNTER
001.000.230.512.500.490.00 1,095.00
Total :1,095.00
133865 8/23/2012 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0082830-IN 0082830-IN EDMONDS PD
REFURBISH ASST CHIEF BADGE
001.000.410.521.100.240.00 30.00
REFURBISH DETECTIVE BADGE
001.000.410.521.210.240.00 35.00
REFURBISH SERGEANT BADGE
10Page:
Packet Page Page 36 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133865 8/23/2012 (Continued)008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 30.00
HANDLING CHARGE
001.000.410.521.100.240.00 4.50
Freight
001.000.410.521.100.240.00 6.90
Total :106.40
133866 8/23/2012 009410 EVERETT STEEL INC 512705 Unit EQ85SD - Supplies
Unit EQ85SD - Supplies
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 301.40
9.5% Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 28.63
Total :330.03
133867 8/23/2012 063953 EVERGREEN STATE HEAT & A/C 19520 City Hall - AC Service Repair
City Hall - AC Service Repair
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 535.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 50.83
Total :585.83
133868 8/23/2012 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU26432 Street - Supplies
Street - Supplies
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 7.55
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 0.72
Total :8.27
133869 8/23/2012 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0343097-1 Meter Inventory - ~
Meter Inventory - ~
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,583.88
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 150.47
Water -Red Brass Pipe Non Inventory0346872
Water -Red Brass Pipe Non Inventory
11Page:
Packet Page Page 37 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133869 8/23/2012 (Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 243.86
7.7% sales tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 18.78
Water Inventory - ~0347405
Water Inventory - ~
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 2,296.32
Water Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 37.90
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 218.15
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.60
Water - Supplies2402367
Water - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 40.94
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.89
Total :4,597.79
133870 8/23/2012 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0417 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.99
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 26.99
PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX,425-712-8251
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 14.18
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 70.89
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 59.55
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 59.55
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 79.39
12Page:
Packet Page Page 38 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133870 8/23/2012 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER
CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5425-775-2455
CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 56.17
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER ALARM LINE425-776-3896
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER FIRE AND
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 111.36
Total :505.07
133871 8/23/2012 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0423-080202-AFTER HOURS PHONE
AFTER HOURS PHONE
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 64.90
Total :64.90
133872 8/23/2012 074141 HAMILTON, LISA HAMILTON15359 PRESCHOOL ART EXPLORATION
PRESCHOOL ART EXPLORATION #
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 399.00
Total :399.00
133873 8/23/2012 070515 HARLEY DAVIDSON OF SEATTLE 59830 Unit 582 - Repairs
Unit 582 - Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 190.00
Unit 582 - Parts and fees
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 425.20
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 18.05
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 40.39
Unit 582 - Brake Pads, Supplies60353
Unit 582 - Brake Pads, Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 315.84
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 30.01
Fleet Supplies60356
Fleet Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 605.88
13Page:
Packet Page Page 39 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133873 8/23/2012 (Continued)070515 HARLEY DAVIDSON OF SEATTLE
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 57.54
Unit 582 - Air Filter Elements61385
Unit 582 - Air Filter Elements
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 74.98
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.11
Unit 203 - Supplies61387
Unit 203 - Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 100.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.50
Total :1,874.50
133874 8/23/2012 060985 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 007D6242 036570
SOLVENT CEMENT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 414.96
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 20.54
Total :435.50
133875 8/23/2012 006030 HDR ENGINEERING INC 0018246-B C-385
C-385 SWITCHGEAR UPGRADE
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 11,513.23
Total :11,513.23
133876 8/23/2012 074138 HIGBEE, NANCY HIGBEE0821 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 500.00
Total :500.00
133877 8/23/2012 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 23343 E2CB.TASK ORDER 12-02.SERVICES THRU
E2CB.Task Order 12-02 Services thru
412.100.630.594.320.410.00 162.00
E2FE.TASK ORDER 12-01.SERVICES THRU23368
14Page:
Packet Page Page 40 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133877 8/23/2012 (Continued)060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC
E2FE.Task Order 12-01 Services thru
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 613.32
Total :775.32
133878 8/23/2012 072041 IBS INCORPORATED 516482-1 Street - Work gloves
Street - Work gloves
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 223.60
Freight
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 12.59
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 22.44
Total :258.63
133879 8/23/2012 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2135476 WRITING PADS
PERFORATED WRITING PADS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 36.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 3.45
Total :39.75
133880 8/23/2012 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2132363 Office supplies DSD
Office supplies DSD
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 347.16
Total :347.16
133881 8/23/2012 067924 INTEGRA CHEMICAL COMPANY 0104052-IN Water - VITA-D-CHLOR Tablets (1000
Water - VITA-D-CHLOR Tablets (1000
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 593.75
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 16.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 57.99
Total :668.54
133882 8/23/2012 071634 INTEGRA TELECOM 9977583 C/A 768328
15Page:
Packet Page Page 41 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133882 8/23/2012 (Continued)071634 INTEGRA TELECOM
PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 1,951.41
Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929;
001.000.240.513.110.420.00 32.26
Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines
001.000.240.513.110.420.00 32.84
Total :2,016.51
133883 8/23/2012 070526 INTERNATIONAL TACTICAL 07-19-12 SWAT 7/19/12 INV 5 DAY SWAT SCHOOL -
5 DAY SWAT SCHOOL 9/22-26/12
001.000.410.521.230.490.00 4,748.10
Total :4,748.10
133884 8/23/2012 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 710021 GLOVES
GLOVES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 258.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 24.56
Total :283.06
133885 8/23/2012 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 709102 Fleet Supplies
Fleet Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 53.67
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 5.10
Total :58.77
133886 8/23/2012 068802 INVENSYS SYSTEMS INC 92848999 1000004933
MAGNETIC FLOW TRANSMITTER
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 1,709.47
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 74.26
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 169.45
100000493392851012
16Page:
Packet Page Page 42 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133886 8/23/2012 (Continued)068802 INVENSYS SYSTEMS INC
MAGNETIC FLOWTUBES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 2,176.91
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 53.65
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 211.91
Total :4,395.65
133887 8/23/2012 069851 JACKYE'S ENTERPRISES INC 9302 Strom - Work T Shirts
Strom - Work T Shirts
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 7.60
Total :87.60
133888 8/23/2012 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 556534 54278825
HYPOCHLORITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,431.68
Total :3,431.68
133889 8/23/2012 072821 JENKINS, CHRISTINA JENKINS0820 REFUND
CUSTOMER REQUESTED REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 73.00
Total :73.00
133890 8/23/2012 065056 JOHNSON, TROY JOHNSON0819 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM MONITOR~
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 120.00
Total :120.00
133891 8/23/2012 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 3601467 INV 3601467
3 CASES COPIER PAPER
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 73.14
HANDLING FEE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.02
17Page:
Packet Page Page 43 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133891 8/23/2012 (Continued)072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 6.95
Total :96.11
133892 8/23/2012 071137 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER KLS15292 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER CLASSES
#15292
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 389.40
#15291
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 389.40
#15290
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 637.20
#15287
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 424.80
#15282
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 106.20
#15281
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 247.80
#15280
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 141.60
#15293
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 318.60
SOCCER CAMP #15246
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 792.00
Total :3,447.00
133893 8/23/2012 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 03142011-03 City Car Washes - July 2012
City Car Washes - July 2012
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 15.09
Total :15.09
133894 8/23/2012 074139 KWON, JUNG JUNG0820 REFUND
REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 58.00
Total :58.00
18Page:
Packet Page Page 44 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133895 8/23/2012 074144 LARRY & LINDA LENZ 8-50129 #00633-001343893 UTILITY REFUND
#00633-001343893 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 28.31
Total :28.31
133896 8/23/2012 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 797622 BLADES
BLADES FOR POLE SAW
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 42.09
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.00
PLATES797677
PLATES FOR HONDA MOWER
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 20.08
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.91
Total :68.08
133897 8/23/2012 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1019 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE1021
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE1022
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE4633
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 50.00
Total :314.96
133898 8/23/2012 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 33711801 123106800
HOSE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 217.37
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7.65
19Page:
Packet Page Page 45 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133898 8/23/2012 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
12310680033711931
STEEL EYEBOLT/POLYESTER ROPE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 428.64
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 10.14
12310680033824709
ACETAL RESIN SHEET
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 295.53
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 15.52
12310680033850900
PIPE/HOSE & TUBE CUTTER
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 161.14
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 11.15
Total :1,147.14
133899 8/23/2012 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 153074 LIFT TRUCK RENTAL
LIFT TRUCK FOR FISHING PIER TO CHANGE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 180.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 17.10
Total :197.10
133900 8/23/2012 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 152727 131
PROPANE
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 46.07
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 4.38
Total :50.45
133901 8/23/2012 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 153098 Storm - Hot Water Pressure Washer
Storm - Hot Water Pressure Washer
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 33.14
9.5% Sales Tax
20Page:
Packet Page Page 46 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133901 8/23/2012 (Continued)020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 3.15
Total :36.29
133902 8/23/2012 074052 MOTHER NATURE'S ORGANICS INC 18239 X FIT PRODUCE BOXES
X FIT PRODUCE BOXES
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 1,024.00
Total :1,024.00
133903 8/23/2012 069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA23-247574 101690-01
OIL SEALS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 102.98
101690-01WA23-247584
1/2 HP MOTOR
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 992.36
Total :1,095.34
133904 8/23/2012 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0480578-IN Fleet Filter Inventory
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 93.56
Unit 98 - Filters
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 26.19
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 8.88
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.49
Total :131.12
133905 8/23/2012 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS 47895 CITYEDMTRE
HOSE/COUPLER/ADAPTER
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,218.25
9.2% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 112.08
Total :1,330.33
133906 8/23/2012 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-511828 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
21Page:
Packet Page Page 47 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133906 8/23/2012 (Continued)061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:MARINA BEACH
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 1,418.55
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-513236
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:PINE STREET PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-514007
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:CIVIC CENTER
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 194.62
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-515340
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:SIERRA PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-515832
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:HUMMINGBIRD PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 194.62
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL2-515611
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:WILLOW CREEK FISH
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35
Total :2,144.84
133907 8/23/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 854983 IPAD CASE
IPad case
001.000.610.519.700.310.00 32.36
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.310.00 3.07
Total :35.43
133908 8/23/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 928937 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES:LAMINATING
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 43.94
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 4.18
OFFICE SUPPLIES928981
TAPE, REINFORCEMENTS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 14.01
9.5% Sales Tax
22Page:
Packet Page Page 48 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133908 8/23/2012 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.33
Total :63.46
133909 8/23/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 874980 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 76.85
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.30
Total :84.15
133910 8/23/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 958568 INV 958568 ACCT 520437 250POL EDMONDS PD
BOX OF CD ROM ENVELOPES
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.52
ADDING MACHINE TAPE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 1.08
CARTON OF KLEENEX
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 44.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 5.02
Total :57.82
133911 8/23/2012 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 137709 DUMP FEES
DUMP FEES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 63.00
DUMP FEES137721
DUMP FEES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 63.00
DUMP FEES137830
DUMP FEES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 73.50
DUMP FEES137843
DUMP FEES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 73.50
Total :273.00
23Page:
Packet Page Page 49 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133912 8/23/2012 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.954023030083 PS - Paint Supplies
PS - Paint Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 70.35
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.68
Total :77.03
133913 8/23/2012 066412 PARKS & RECREATION DAYCAMP CAMPCASH0821 DAYCAMP PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT OF DAYCAMP SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.530.310.00 257.53
DAYCAMP PHOTO PRINTING REIMBURSEMENT
001.000.640.575.530.490.00 3.18
Total :260.71
133914 8/23/2012 069338 PARTNER CONSTRUCTION PRODUCT 5030 Roadway - Crack Sealer
Roadway - Crack Sealer
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 3,384.00
Freight
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 85.00
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 329.56
Total :3,798.56
133915 8/23/2012 008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC PCASH0822 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENTS
REPAIR SUPPLIES FOR GYMNASTICS EQUIPMENT
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 13.14
FOOD SUPPLIES FOR X FIT NUTRITION CLASS
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 58.10
INK CARTRIDGES FOR POOL
001.000.640.575.510.310.00 34.38
PRESCHOOL GAMES
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 2.19
PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 3.88
DAYCAMP SUPPLIES
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 1.10
24Page:
Packet Page Page 50 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133915 8/23/2012 (Continued)008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC
SUPPLIES FOR 7/26 X FIT NUTRITION CLASS
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 65.17
PUBLIC ART SUPPLIES
117.200.640.575.500.310.00 14.28
CRAFT SUPPLIES FOR GYMNASTICS CAMP
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 20.74
PRESCHOOL LAMINATING &SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 11.49
ICE FOR PICNIC
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 17.90
Total :242.37
133916 8/23/2012 064552 PITNEY BOWES 9607730AU12 POSTAGE METER LEASE
Lease 7/30-8/30
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 718.60
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 68.26
Total :786.86
133917 8/23/2012 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 2127162 211958
PVC JCT BOX
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 47.28
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 4.49
Total :51.77
133918 8/23/2012 064167 POLLARDWATER.COM-EAST I331809-IN Water - Suppleis
Water - Suppleis
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 454.00
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 22.38
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 45.26
Total :521.64
25Page:
Packet Page Page 51 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133919 8/23/2012 071594 PROFORCE LAW ENFORCEMENT 146385 INV 146385 EDMONDS PD
M26/X26 TASER CARTRIDGES
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 2,490.00
HANDLING CHARGE
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 9.95
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 237.50
Total :2,737.45
133920 8/23/2012 073915 PUGET SOUND FIN OFFICERS ASSOC 2012-20 PSFOA MEETING 7/11/12 S HUNSTOCK
PSFOA 7/11/12 Meeting - Topic:
001.000.310.514.100.490.00 25.00
Total :25.00
133921 8/23/2012 030695 PUMPTECH INC 0057299-IN 0047800
CHECK BALLS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 3,072.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 73.52
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 298.83
Total :3,444.35
133922 8/23/2012 006841 RICOH USA INC 5023493335 Additional images - Ricoh 907EX
Additional images - Ricoh 907EX
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 42.44
Total :42.44
133923 8/23/2012 074071 RIVENWORKS MOSAICS 246 HAZEL MILLER MOSAIC
FINAL PAYMENT ON HAZEL MILLER MOSAIC
117.200.640.575.500.410.00 2,168.95
9.5% Sales Tax
117.200.640.575.500.410.00 206.05
Total :2,375.00
133924 8/23/2012 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 7792 PUBLIC DEFENDER
26Page:
Packet Page Page 52 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133924 8/23/2012 (Continued)069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN
PUBLIC DEFENDER
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 1,600.00
Total :1,600.00
133925 8/23/2012 069477 ROTARY OFFSET PRESS INC 24523 FALL CRAZE PRODUCTION
FALL CRAZE 2012
001.000.640.574.200.490.00 2,466.10
FALL CRAZE 2012
117.100.640.573.100.440.00 3,652.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.200.490.00 234.28
9.5% Sales Tax
117.100.640.573.100.440.00 347.03
Total :6,700.38
133926 8/23/2012 033550 SALMON BAY SAND & GRAVEL 2305191 Street - Rapid Set Mortar Mix
Street - Rapid Set Mortar Mix
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 62.08
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 5.90
Total :67.98
133927 8/23/2012 074083 SCHREIBER STARLING & LANE 2 FAC -ADA Improvements and Replacement
FAC -ADA Improvements and Replacement
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 3,600.00
Total :3,600.00
133928 8/23/2012 071776 SHULL, ERIN SHULL15319 JUMP IT UP CAMP
JUMP IT UP CAMP #15319
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,000.00
Total :1,000.00
133929 8/23/2012 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0141207-IN Unit 411 - 9" Locking Slide Arm
Unit 411 - 9" Locking Slide Arm
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 191.75
27Page:
Packet Page Page 53 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133929 8/23/2012 (Continued)068489 SIRENNET.COM
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.75
Total :206.50
133930 8/23/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-6027-1 9537 BOWDOIN WAY
9537 BOWDOIN WAY/POOL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 2,478.62
Total :2,478.62
133931 8/23/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0254-7 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95TH AVE W
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95TH AVE W
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W2003-4823-3
TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 62.92
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW2003-9895-6
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,059.47
LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W2006-1131-7
LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 150.81
LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN2008-6520-2
LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 101.78
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219TH ST SW2011-5141-2
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST2015-5174-4
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,889.58
TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W2016-1195-1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 41.56
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW2017-5147-6
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW
28Page:
Packet Page Page 54 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133931 8/23/2012 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 79.98
TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW2019-0786-2
TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 39.93
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW2019-4248-9
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 70.21
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 266.78
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 266.78
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 266.78
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 266.78
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 266.76
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N2022-9166-2
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 4,197.31
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188TH ST SW2024-2780-3
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.64
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N2024-3924-6
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,231.20
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 1400 OLYMPIC AVE2025-1986-4
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 1400 OLYMPIC AVE
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW2028-0763-2
TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 31.68
WATER TOWER 8519 BOWDOIN WAY2036-5215-1
WATER TOWER 8519 BOWDOIN WAY
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 226.97
29Page:
Packet Page Page 55 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :11,642.96133931 8/23/2012 037375 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
133932 8/23/2012 065176 SNOHOMISH CO TOURISM BUREAU EDM0812 TOURISM PROMOTION AWARD FOR VISITOR CTR
Tourism promotion award to Sno County
120.000.310.575.420.410.00 3,000.00
Total :3,000.00
133933 8/23/2012 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES Aug 17 2012 Fraley-Monillas/Johnson attend SCC
Fraley-Monillas/Johnson attend SCC
001.000.110.511.100.490.00 46.00
Total :46.00
133934 8/23/2012 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 08172012 ASH DISPOSAL
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 3,441.75
Total :3,441.75
133935 8/23/2012 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO Sept Standard Insur SEPTEMBER STANDARD INSURANCE
September Standard Insurance Premiums
811.000.000.231.550.000.00 13,996.19
Total :13,996.19
133936 8/23/2012 009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 3168159 Water - Supplies
Water - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 151.61
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 14.40
Sewer - Green Upside down paint3170224
Sewer - Green Upside down paint
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 190.20
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 18.07
Sewer - Ridge Set Jaw Inserts3170884
Sewer - Ridge Set Jaw Inserts
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 90.07
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 14.52
30Page:
Packet Page Page 56 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133936 8/23/2012 (Continued)009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 9.94
Total :488.81
133937 8/23/2012 067148 STERNBERG LANTERNS INC 19584 E7AA.STERNBERG LIGHTS
E7AA.Sternberg Lights
112.200.630.595.330.410.00 49,432.00
Total :49,432.00
133938 8/23/2012 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100262553.002 FISH PIER LIGHTS
HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LAMPS FOR FISHING
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 174.48
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.49
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 17.67
Total :203.64
133939 8/23/2012 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100264778.001 FS 17 - Elect Supplies
FS 17 - Elect Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.27
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.26
Total :14.53
133940 8/23/2012 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 13873 Sewer -Gas Monitor Troubleshooting
Sewer -Gas Monitor Troubleshooting
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 407.00
Total :407.00
133941 8/23/2012 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1790283 NEWSPAPER ADS
Ord. #3892
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 30.96
Total :30.96
133942 8/23/2012 074145 THE ESTATE OF NADINE OKINSELLA 1-25000 #4221-1903429 UTILITY REFUND
31Page:
Packet Page Page 57 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133942 8/23/2012 (Continued)074145 THE ESTATE OF NADINE OKINSELLA
#4221-1903429 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 184.50
Total :184.50
133943 8/23/2012 065459 THE HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 11843419 PW Admin - 1 Yr Subscription-
PW Admin - 1 Yr Subscription-
001.000.650.519.910.490.00 177.00
Total :177.00
133944 8/23/2012 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-71071 EDEN CASHIERING INSTALLATION
EDEN Cashiering Installation
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 60.00
EDEN Cashiering Installation
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 30.00
EDEN Cashiering Installation
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 30.00
EDEN Cashiering Installation
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 30.00
EDEN CASHIERING CONSULTING045-71778
EDEN Cashiering consulting time
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 60.00
EDEN Cashiering consulting time
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 30.00
EDEN Cashiering consulting time
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 30.00
EDEN Cashiering consulting time
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 30.00
Total :300.00
133945 8/23/2012 062693 US BANK 3249 POSTAGE FOR PASSPORT APPLICATIONS
POSTAGE FOR PASSPORT APPLICATIONS
001.000.230.512.500.420.00 98.00
Total :98.00
133946 8/23/2012 062693 US BANK 6254 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS
32Page:
Packet Page Page 58 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133946 8/23/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
PRODUCE BOX #3 FOR X FIT CAMP
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 992.00
TICKETS FOR SISTER CITY HEKINAN
138.200.210.557.210.490.00 264.00
PAYMENT PROCESSING FOR WOTS
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 750.00
ADDING $TO ORCA CARD FOR SENIOR
001.000.640.575.530.430.00 100.00
PRODUCE BOX FOR X FIT CAMP
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 1,024.00
UMBRELLA STANDS FOR HAZEL MILLER PLAZA
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 98.07
UMBRELLAS FOR HAZEL MILLER PLAZA
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 199.44
Total :3,427.51
133947 8/23/2012 074147 US BANK NATIONAL ASSOC 3-21075 #2933444-01 UTILITY REFUND
#2933444-01 Utility Refund -
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 127.10
Total :127.10
133948 8/23/2012 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 47649 INV 47649 EDMONDS PD CASE 12-3043
TOW AEN7143 2001 FORD MUSTANG
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 158.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 15.01
Total :173.01
133949 8/23/2012 026510 WCIA 100917 STORAGE TANKS/INSURANCE
STORAGE TANKS/INSURANCE
411.000.656.538.800.510.00 703.00
Total :703.00
133950 8/23/2012 074140 WECHSLER, DENISE WECHSLER0820 REFUND
REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION
33Page:
Packet Page Page 59 of 98
08/23/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
7:44:05AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
133950 8/23/2012 (Continued)074140 WECHSLER, DENISE
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 100.00
Total :100.00
133951 8/23/2012 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 7622 INV 7622 EDMONDS PD
MOTOROLA MTS-2000 BATTERIES
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 735.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 69.83
Total :804.83
133952 8/23/2012 065936 WESSPUR TREE EQUIPMENT INC IN-74881 Unit 139 - Chipper Knife
Unit 139 - Chipper Knife
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 174.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.53
Total :190.53
Bank total :638,586.89129Vouchers for bank code :front
638,586.89Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report129
34Page:
Packet Page Page 60 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA
General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA
STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC
STM NPDES m013 E7FG
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA
STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB
STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA
STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA
STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB
STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA
STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 61 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA
SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC
SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD
SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA
SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB
SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA
SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA
WTR 2012 Street Overlay Program c388 E2CA
WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE
WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA
WTR 5th Avenue Overlay Project c399 E2CC
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB
WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB
WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 62 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STR E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support
WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs
STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming
STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM E1FA c336 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects
STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
SWR E1GA c347 Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update
WTR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood
WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study
WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment
WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
WTR E2CA c388 2012 Street Overlay Program
WTR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair
WTR E2CC c399 5th Avenue Overlay Project
PM E2DB c146 Interurban Trail
STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012
STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 63 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update
SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements
WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements
STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project
STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project
General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program
STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road
STM E7FG m013 NPDES
PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza
SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR E8GC c300 BNSF Double Track Project
SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements
PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program
STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project
STM E9FB c307 Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements
SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design
PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 64 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number Project Title
WTR c141 E3JB OVD Watermain Improvements
SWR c142 E3GB OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements
PM c146 E2DB Interurban Trail
General c238 E6MA SR99 Enhancement Program
STR c245 E6DA 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project
STR c256 E6DB Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project
STR c265 E7AA Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements
STR c268 E7CB Shell Valley Emergency Access Road
PM c276 E7MA Dayton Street Plaza
PM c282 E8MA Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM c290 E8MB Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR c294 E9CA 2009 Street Overlay Program
SWR c298 E8GA Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR c300 E8GC BNSF Double Track Project
SWR c301 E8GD City-Wide Sewer Improvements
SWR c304 E9GA Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design
STM c307 E9FB Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements
STR c312 E9DA 226th Street Walkway Project
PM c321 E9MA Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements
WTR c324 E0IA AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
STM c326 E0FC Stormwater GIS Support
FAC c327 E0LA Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
STR c329 E0AA 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
FAC c332 E0LB Senior Center Roof Repairs
WTR c333 E1JA 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
STM c336 E1FA SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
STM c339 E1FD Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
WTR c340 E1JE 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
STM c341 E1FF Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects
STR c342 E1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR c343 E1AB 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming
WTR c344 E1JB 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood
WTR c345 E1JC Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 65 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number Project Title
WTR c346 E1JD PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment
SWR c347 E1GA Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
STM c349 E1FH Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
STR c354 E1DA Sunset Walkway Improvements
WTR c363 E0JA 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
STR c368 E1CA 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
SWR c369 E2GA 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update
SWR c370 E1GB Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update
General c372 E1EA SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM c374 E1FM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
WTR c375 E1JK Main Street Watermain
STM c376 E1FN Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
STM c378 E2FA North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
STM c379 E2FB SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM c380 E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
STM c381 E2FD Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012
STM c382 E2FE 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements
WTR c388 E2CA 2012 Street Overlay Program
WTR c389 E2CB Pioneer Way Road Repair
SWR c390 E2GB Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
STR c391 E2AA Transportation Plan Update
STR c392 E2AB 9th Avenue Improvement Project
WTR c397 E3JA 2013 Waterline Replacement Program
SWR c398 E3GA 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
WTR c399 E2CC 5th Avenue Overlay Project
STR i005 E7AC 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STM m013 E7FG NPDES
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 66 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA
STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB
WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA
STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
WTR 2012 Street Overlay Program c388 E2CA
WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA
STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA
STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC
WTR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC
STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB
SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC
STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC
FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD
SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 67 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM NPDES m013 E7FG
SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB
WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD
STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD
PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA
SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB
STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB
General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA
General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB
STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA
STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
Revised 8/23/2012Packet Page Page 68 of 98
PROJECT NUMBERS
(Phase and Task Numbers)
Phases and Tasks (Engineering Division)
Phase Title
ct Construction
ds Design
pl Preliminary
sa Site Acquisition & Prep
st Study
ro Right-of-Way
Task Title
196 Traffic Engineering & Studies
197 MAIT
198 CTR
199 Engineering Plans & Services
950 Engineering Staff Time
970 Construction Management
981 Contract
990 Miscellaneous
991 Retainage
stm Engineering Staff Time-Storm
str Engineering Staff Time-Street
swr Engineering Staff Time-Sewer
wtr Engineering Staff Time-Water
prk Engineering Staff Time-Park
Packet Page Page 69 of 98
AM-5086 5.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:08/28/2012
Time:15 Minutes
Submitted By:Robert English
Department:Engineering
Review Committee: Committee Action:
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Report on bids opened August 27, 2012 for the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk
Enhancements Project (5th Ave to 6th Ave) and possible award of a construction contract.
Recommendation
Staff will review the bids received on August 27, 2012 and provide a recommended action with regard to
contract award at the City Council meeting.
Previous Council Action
On May 15, 2012, the City Council authorized staff to advertise for construction bids for the Main St.
Improvement Project.
On July 10, 2012, the Planning, Parks and Public Works Committee reviewed this item and
recommended the item be placed on the agenda after the construction bids were received.
On August 14, 2012, the City Council approved a resolution to reject all bids received on August 9, 2012
for the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project (5th Ave to 6th Ave).
Narrative
On August 9, 2012, the City received four bids for the Main St. Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk
Enhancements project. In reviewing the bid documents for all four bidders, errors were found in meeting
the Disadvantage Business Enterprise goal for the project. The City Council rejected all bids on August
14, 2012 and the project was re-advertised with a new bid opening date of August 27, 2012.
Staff will report on the bids received and a recommendation will be provided to the City Council on the
award of a construction contract to complete the project.
HISTORY:
In 2010, the City was successful in securing a $725,000 grant to add historic decorative street lighting and
replace sidewalks, curb and gutter on Main Street between 5th and 6th Avenues. The grant is funded by
the federal transportation enhancement program and a local match is not required. The project will install
new light poles and decorative poles for planter baskets and artist made elements. The new sidewalk will
improve pedestrian safety by replacing sidewalk that has been displaced by existing street trees along the
corridor. The existing street trees will be removed due to the damage they are causing to the surrounding
infrastructure and replaced with new street trees that are better suited for this location.
Packet Page Page 70 of 98
In addition to the federal grant, the City received a direct appropriation of $500,000 from the State
Legislature in April 2012 to add more improvements and enhance the project. These improvements
include street furniture, a mid-block pedestrian crossing, relocation of overhead power to an adjacent
alley, street pavement reconstruction and use of low impact stormwater devices and materials. Please
refer to the attached drawing.
Attachments
Main St. Drawing
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Engineering Robert English 08/24/2012 07:55 AM
Public Works Phil Williams 08/24/2012 08:11 AM
City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/24/2012 08:30 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 08/24/2012 09:22 AM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 08/24/2012 09:53 AM
Form Started By: Robert English Started On: 08/24/2012 07:27 AM
Final Approval Date: 08/24/2012
Packet Page Page 71 of 98
Packet Page Page 72 of 98
AM-5082 6.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:08/28/2012
Time:20 Minutes
Submitted For:Leonard Yarberry Submitted By:Rob Chave
Department:Development Services
Committee: Planning, Parks, Public Works Type: Information
Information
Subject Title
Permitting fees for solar installations.
Recommendation
See discussion.
Previous Council Action
This item was discussed by Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee on August 14th. Referred to full
Council for discussion.
Narrative
A question has been forwarded to staff regarding how permit fees are set for solar installations, and
specifically whether the Council would consider reducing or eliminating permitting fees.
Currently there is no specific fee for solar permits in our adopted fee schedule Table 1 other than
identifying them as residential or commercial alterations and feeing them based on straight valuation of
the project. There does, however, exist a measure of discretion afforded to the building official in
determining the method of calculating valuation. For example, the current method of establishing
valuation for commercial solar projects deducts the cost of some of the electrical equipment (panels and
inverters) from the total job cost in order to establish a more realistic valuation and thus the permit fee is
more commensurate with the actual costs incurred by the City. This method has recently been
implemented by the building official after researching and monitoring practices and trends in other
jurisdictions. Previously, the permit fees were figured using the unaltered valuation provided by the
applicant. Please see attached Exhibit 1 that shows the actual permit fees charged to the Anderson Center
Phase 1 project last year compared to what the fees would be on the exact same scope of work if it was
permitted today. Since the Anderson project is the only commercial installation the city has had
experience with, we have limited history with which to work and draw other comparisons.
Applicants for residential solar permits are currently charged a flat fee of $135 by the City, which merely
covers the minimal amount of staff time needed for a simple review and a single inspection. This fee was
also recently established by the building official, and drastically reduces what charges would take place
using the valuation approach. This method works well since residential solar installations are typically
quite simple.
In addition to the City permit fee, a solar applicant would also be responsible for obtaining a separate
electrical permit.
Packet Page Page 73 of 98
The setting of fees is ultimately a policy call by the Council. The issue can be framed in several ways:
First, at this point in time there are very few solar projects being permitted, so the opportunity cost
of reducing or eliminating fees is negligible at this time (i.e. we're not losing much revenue if we're not
getting any applications anyway).
A second way of looking at it is whether you might want to incentivize construction/building techniques
that implement the Community Sustainability Element, which has policy direction regarding encouraging
energy efficiency, for example. Along these lines, you could view it as a short-term measure to maximize
resources going toward sustainable building/energy practices. In this way, waiving fees for a specific
period of time (3 years? pick a number...) could fit within that policy direction. At this stage of the solar
energy game, the industry is arguing that it needs as much help as it can get, given the state of the
economy and the economies of scale working against solar energy in general.
On the other hand, setting fees at a minimum level intended to capture some part of the staff time needed
to review installations has some merit, particularly if many different interest groups have similar
arguments for low or reduced fees. Low rent or low income housing? Hospital projects that support
community health? Other non-profit-sponsored projects that benefit the community? Stressed economic
times? Who's to say which imperative is more important or deserving?
Also, for the Committee's information, the City of Edmonds is a current participant in a Department of
Energy grant project (the Evergreen State Solar Partnership, or ESSP) examining ways of standardizing
and minimizing costs for solar energy projects state-wide. We expect positive outcomes from this project
that will help standarize an approach to solar permitting throughout Washington State. At the same time,
we expect to develop a more formal and effective policy for the City of Edmonds, including a possible
refinement of our fee structure. In the ESSP's own words, the purpose of the project is:
"The Evergreen State Solar Partnership (ESSP), under the leadership of the Washington Department of
Commerce and the US DOE SunShot initiative, is working to make rooftop solar energy cost-competitive
with other forms of electricity by reducing the “soft costs” of installing solar generation. The ESSP
includes a coalition of four jurisdictions – Bellevue, Edmonds, Ellensburg and Seattle - and their load
serving utilities – Puget Sound Energy, Snohomish Public Utility District, City of Ellensburg, and Seattle
City Light. The ESSP is working closely with solar industry and community advocates, including
Northwest SEED, Solar Washington, and Sustainable Connections, to ensure that the interconnection and
permitting processes across our four jurisdictions and utilities are standardized in a manner consistent
with industry best practices. Our aim is to produce standard practices that can be adopted across
Washington State, to reduce the cost of installing solar generation and accelerate the deployment of
distributed generation."
Attachments
08-24-12 Planning, Parks & Public Works Committee Minutes
Exhibit 1: Community Solar Fee Comparison
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/22/2012 05:33 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 08/23/2012 10:03 AM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 08/23/2012 05:17 PM
Form Started By: Leonard Yarberry Started On: 08/22/2012 10:14 AM
Final Approval Date: 08/23/2012
Packet Page Page 74 of 98
Packet Page Page 75 of 98
M I N U T E S
Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee Meeting
August 14, 2012
Elected Officials Present: Staff Present:
Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Rob English, City Engineer
Council Member Lora Petso Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Leonard Yarberry, Building Official
The committee convened at 6:15p.m.
A. Permitting fees for solar installations.
Mr. Yarberry introduced the topic and updated the committee on current policies on fees for
residential and commercial solar projects. Residential projects are charged a flat fee of $135
and commercial installation fees are based upon valuation, using a modified approach. The
committee suggested moving to full Council to discuss the possibility of using waivers as
incentives.
ACTION: Schedule for Council discussion at future meeting
B. Authorization for Mayor to sign Supplemental Agreement #2 with David Evans &
Associates for the 76th Ave. W @ 212th St. SW Intersection Improvement Project.
Mr. English reviewed the scope of work and services to be provided under the proposed
Supplemental Agreement #2 with David Evans & Associates for the intersection improvements at
76th Ave and 212th St.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
C. Approval of Right-of-Way, Administrative Settlement and Appraisal Waiver Procedures on
Federal-Aid Projects.
Mr. English presented the proposed revisions to the right-of-way, administrative settlement and
appraisal waiver procedures on Federal-Aid projects. He discussed how these procedures are
applied when acquiring right-of-way on transportation projects funded by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA).
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
D. Report on final construction costs for the Lift Station 2 Replacement Project and
acceptance of project.
Mr. English provided a brief summary of the Lift Station 2 improvements and that the project is
now complete and ready for acceptance. The final construction contract amount was $62,915
below the original contract amount with the Contractor.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
Packet Page Page 76 of 98
Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee Minutes
August 14, 2012
Page 2
2
F. Report on bids opened July 31, 2012 for the A-Basin Upgrade Project and award of
contract to Moon Construction Co. Inc. ($174,530.96 including sales tax).
Mr. Williams reviewed the bid results for the A-Basin upgrade project and recommended the
project be awarded to Moon Construction in the amount of $174,530.96.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
G. Report on bids opened August 2, 2012 for the Building Roof Replacement Project and
award of contract to Kruger Sheet Metal ($344,925 including sales tax).
Mr. Williams reviewed the bid results for the Building Roof Replacement project and
recommended the project be awarded to Kruger Sheet Metal in the amount of $344,925.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
H. Authorization to award a construction contract for the 2012 Waterline Overlay Project.
Mr. English explained that the City was scheduled to receive quotations for the 2012 Waterline
Overlay project on August 16, 2012. The project will repair and overlay three City streets that
were disturbed during the waterline replacement work in 2011.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
I. Authorization for Mayor to approve acceptance and recording of Public Pedestrian
Access Easements.
Mr. English discussed why a public pedestrian access easement was required as part of the
Edmonds Way Apartment Complex improvements. The easement provides for a proper
sidewalk alignment and clearances around existing utilities on Edmonds Way.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
J. Authorization for Mayor to sign Supplemental Agreement No. 2 with Parametrix, Inc. for
the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancement Project.
Mr. English presented the scope of work and fees for Supplemental Agreement No. 2 with
Parametrix, Inc for the Main St. Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancement Project. The
engineering services will be provided during the upcoming construction phase.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
K. Report on Bids Opened August 9, 2012 for the Lift Station Rehabilitation Project and
Award of Contract.
Mr. English discussed the bids that were received for the Lift Station Rehabilitation Project and
that Razz Construction was the apparent low bidder with a bid of $3,872,095. If staff finds the
bid documents to be acceptable, then the item will be placed on the consent agenda for
approval.
Packet Page Page 77 of 98
Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee Minutes
August 14, 2012
Page 3
3
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
L. Authorization to approve easements for the Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Project.
Mr. English explained that the proposed temporary construction easements are needed for the
Lift Station Rehabilitation Project. The documents have been signed by the property owners and
are ready for approval.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
Councilmember Petso left the meeting prior to item E being discussed.
E. Authorization for Mayor to sign Interlocal Agreement with Olympic View Water and Sewer
District (OVWSD) to install sewerline and associated appurtenances as part of the 224th
St. SW Sewer Replacement Project.
Mr. Williams provided a brief overview of the Interlocal Agreement with Olympic View Water and
Sewer District for the 224th St. SW sewer replacement project. Mr. Williams explained how this
section of sewer main on 224th St. has been a problem area for the City in past years and that
this project would improve the operation of the conveyance system.
ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval.
M. Public Comments
Mr. Ken Reidy provided comments regarding an e-mail previously sent to Council and the City
Attorney about 704 Fir St.
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Packet Page Page 78 of 98
Permit BLD2011-0571 (Phase 1 at Anderson Center)
Project valuation as on permit: $42,000. Net total permit fee of $1385.50
If same project was applied for today:
Project valuation would be based on the numbers in the chart above:
System Cost $39,160.05
Deduct 22 modules <$20,333.61>
Deduct Inverter <$3,321.20>
Total $15,505.24
Permit fee based on $15,505.24 would be $621.50
Packet Page Page 79 of 98
AM-4999 7.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:08/28/2012
Time:60 Minutes
Submitted For:Councilwoman Bloom Submitted By:Jana
Spellman
Department:City Council
Review Committee: Public Safety/Personnel Committee Action:
Type: Information
Information
Subject Title
Discussion regarding taking minutes/notes during executive sessions.
Recommendation
Previous Council Action
During the July 17, 2007 Council Meeting there was a discussion regarding Executive Sessions (minutes
attached). During that meeting Resolution 1150 (attached) was approved and placed on the August 8,
2007 consent agenda and approved.
This agenda item was discussed during the 2012 City Council Retreat (minutes attached). It was
discussed again at the March 20, 2012 Council Meeting (minutes attached). It was then discussed during
the Public Safety and Personnel Committee on June 12, 2012 (minutes attached).
Narrative
The purpose of the discussion on March 20, 2012 was to determine if there are changes that are desired
with regard to City Council Resolution No. 853 which established the procedure for keeping and
retaining minutes of City Council executive sessions. A copy of the Resolution is attached.
Jim Doherty, Legal Consultant, from the Municipal Research and Services Center will be making a
presentation regarding issues involving notes and minutes of executive sessions.
Attachments
7-17-2007 Approved Council Minutes
2012 Council Retreat Minutes
3-20-12 Approved Council Minutes
6-12-2012 Public Safety/Personnel Committee Minutes
Resolution No. 853
Resolution 1150
Packet Page Page 80 of 98
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/22/2012 05:33 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 08/23/2012 10:06 AM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 08/23/2012 05:17 PM
Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 08/01/2012 02:38 PM
Final Approval Date: 08/23/2012
Packet Page Page 81 of 98
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 17, 2007
Page 15
proposal adhered to GMA policies, met the GMA housing goals, fit within the surrounding uses, was
suitable and met the value criteria.
Councilmember Orvis spoke against the motion, commenting if allowing additional units on a site was
required to get buildings upgraded, the entire City would be rezoned eventually which was contradictory
to the changes, suitability and surrounding area criteria.
Councilmember Marin spoke in favor of the motion, noting there were many requirements a developer
must meet currently. He supported having the Planning Board consider the multi family zoning but
cautioned against requiring sustainability as he was hesitant to mandate sustainability in private buildings.
Councilmember Wambolt spoke in support of the motion. In response to Mr. Bernheim, he noted the
benefit of the rezone and subsequent new construction which would be more energy efficient than the
existing homes that were constructed in 1946 and 1966.
Councilmember Plunkett commented in a quasi judicial hearing the Council could not consider what
should be, only whether the applicant met the criteria with their proposal. He found the applicant met the
criteria under the existing code, zoning and Comprehensive Plan.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS OPPOSED.
10. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, requested the Council consider term limits for Boards and Commissions as
well as the City Council and the Mayor. Council President Olson cautioned him to avoid campaign
issues. Next, Mr. Hertrich commented he could not recall a Council meeting being cancelled when he
was on the Council and he objected to giving the Council President that power.
11. DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE INCLUDING: (1)
CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS, (2) EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, (3) GOVERNMENT ACCESS
CHANNEL 21, AND (4) COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS.
Council President Olson explained these issues were discussed at the recent Council retreat.
Cancellation of Meetings
Council President Olson did not envision this occurring very often, noting it occurred in the past due to
the loss of the Police Chief. As it was not possible to talk to each Councilmember because that was
considered a rolling quorum, there needed to be a way to cancel Council meetings.
Councilmember Marin was satisfied with delegating that authority to the Council President.
Councilmember Plunkett agreed.
Councilmember Dawson envisioned it would be a rare occurrence for the Council President to exercise
his/her authority to cancel a meeting. She acknowledged two meetings were cancelled earlier this year
due to Police Chief Stern’s sudden illness and subsequent memorial service. She found it inappropriate to
require staff and/or Council to attend a meeting under those circumstances. She remarked it was a waste
of public resources to schedule a meeting if there was no business as each Councilmember was paid,
some staff members were paid, etc. She concluded it was appropriate to delegate that authority to the
Council President.
Councilmember Moore commented the proposed method was more efficient. She noted a Council
President who cancelled meetings that the Council did not want to have cancelled would answer to the
Council.
Term Limits
Meeting
Cancellations
Council Rules
of Procedure
Packet Page Page 82 of 98
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 17, 2007
Page 16
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3656. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The ordinance reads as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE
PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, CHAPTER 1.04 COUNCIL MEETINGS TO
ADD A NEW SECTION 1.04.140 CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS, AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
Executive Session
Councilmember Plunkett advised he requested a resolution be prepared regarding Executive Sessions. He
recalled during the discussions of the park in south Edmonds over the past year, there was some confusion
regarding what information was and was not Executive Session, whether the Council should discuss
certain issues in Executive Session and in at least one instance the confidentially of an Executive Session
was broken. The intent of the resolution was to identify a way for the Council to reach a consensus
regarding when to break the confidentially of an Executive Session. He advised this resolution would
accomplish two purposes, 1) if a Councilmember believed an Executive Session was taking place that
should not, they could propose a motion to end the Executive Session and the Council could have
discussion and make a determination during the public meeting, and 2) prevent any one member from
revealing information that other Councilmembers believed was protected by Executive Session.
Councilmember Dawson commented the resolution did not appear to address Councilmembers
questioning whether the Council should be in Executive Session; she agreed it was appropriate for
Councilmembers to have the ability to question whether a topic should be discussed in Executive Session.
She noted the draft resolution also addressed the dissatisfaction expressed at the retreat with the way
meetings were handled, the way Councilmembers were recognized and the number of times each
Councilmembers could speak.
Councilmember Moore agreed the resolution did not appear to provide Councilmembers a way to
question an inappropriate Executive Session. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised a Councilmember
could always leave an Executive Session that they felt was inappropriate. He noted the City kept minutes
of Executive Session to satisfy the public at a future date that the Council discussed the appropriate issue.
He explained the Council could reach consensus in Executive Session. If the Council agreed to discuss an
issue in the open meeting, they could come out of Executive Session and make a motion to have the issue
placed on a future agenda and/or request information be released. In the absence of a motion, the
confidence of the Executive Session would be observed. He noted the resolution did not address the
appropriateness of a subject for Executive Session because that was addressed in state law.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled there were Councilmembers who revealed information that the Council
had agreed should not be disclosed. His intent was to develop rules so that all Councilmembers had the
same understanding. Mr. Snyder agreed, noting release of confidential Executive Session information
was a crime and a potential basis for forfeiture of office. The resolution was intended to establish an
orderly way to decide when Executive Session privilege ended. He concluded Executive Session
information remained confidential as long as the Council felt it should remain confidential.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
SCHEDULE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1150 ON A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Committee Assignments
Council President Olson explained in the past some Council committee meetings were paid and others
were not; in assigning committees, it seemed more prudent to simply pay Councilmembers for a
Ord# 3656
Cancellation of
Council
Meetings
Packet Page Page 83 of 98
Edmonds City Council Retreat Approved Minutes
February 2-3, 2012
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RETREAT
APPROVED MINUTES
February 2-3, 2012
The Edmonds City Council retreat was called to order at 10:04 a.m. on Thursday, February 2, 2012 in the
Brackett Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Thursday, February 2
Dave Earling, Mayor
Strom Peterson, Council President
Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember
Joan Bloom, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Lora Petso, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
PUBLIC PRESENT
Thursday, February 2
Bruce Witenberg
Darrol Haug
Ron Wambolt
Harry Gatjens
Al Rutledge
Roger Hertrich
Evan Pierce
Ken Reidy
Bruce Faires
Jim Orvis
STAFF PRESENT
Thursday, February 2
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief
Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic
Development Director
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director
Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director/Interim
Human Resources Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Carl Nelson, CIO
Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Eng. Program Mgr.
Leonard Yarberry, Building Official
Rob English, City Engineer
Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Tod Moles, Street Operations Manager
Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Manager
Cindi Cruz, Executive Assistant
Kody McConnell, Executive Assistant
Carolyn LaFave, Executive Assistant
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2012 – CALL TO ORDER
Council President Peterson called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m.
• Introduction/Brief Preview of Retreat Agenda
Council President Peterson explained in preparation for the retreat he asked the Council, Mayor and staff to
identify issues important for 2012. Most of the issues were included on the retreat agenda; some will be on
future Council agendas throughout the year. Mike Bailey, Redmond’s Finance Director, is ill and unable to
make the presentation regarding budgeting by priorities. Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will introduce the
topic today. Mr. Bailey will be invited to provide a workshop to the Council in the next few weeks to explore
the concept in detail.
Packet Page Page 84 of 98
Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes
February 2-3, 2010
Page 2
Council President Peterson explained because this is a relatively young City Council with the majority of
Councilmembers in their first term, roles and responsibilities of the Council was a topic that many identified. A
consultant recommended by AWC will make a presentation tomorrow to review the relationship between City
Council and Mayor in a strong Mayor/Council form of government. Council President Peterson briefly reviewed
other topics on the retreat agenda.
Councilmembers and staff introduced themselves.
Audience Comments
Darrol Haug, Edmonds, thanked the Council for their efforts. This is the third retreat he has attended and he
enjoys the open, candid dialogue that occurs at retreats that does not happen at City Council meetings. Today is
Groundhog Day; in this case the shadow looming is the budget issue. Because 2012 is not an election year, he
suggested it would be a good time for the Council to continue the spirit of the retreat and establish a policy to
solve the budget gap. Budgeting by priorities was studied by the levy committee and he urged the Council to
consider that concept as a way to help the City. He looked forward to a concerted effort to identify policies early
in the process and was hopeful the shadow of the budget gap would not be quite as looming next year.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, acknowledged the City did its best during the snow. He reported there was no mail
delivery on SR 104/205th or on 76th for four days due to snow which could have been a problem for someone
expecting medical supplies via mail. On the fifth day of the snow, a car hit a pole causing a power outage in the
Lake Ballinger area. He suggested the situation be reviewed by the Police Chief. Next, he suggested the Council
discuss the sale of Robin Hood Lanes and hold a public hearing.
Council President Peterson referred to an email from Ken Reidy, Edmonds, regarding executive sessions. Mr.
Reidy’s email cited the preamble to the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) which states in
part, the people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in
delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know
and what is not good for them to know. In Mr. Reidy’s opinion, state law requires the eventual release of
executive session meeting minutes to the citizens such as after real estate has been purchased, after publically
bid contracts are finalized or after pending litigation has been settled and/or all appeal rights related to the
litigation have been exhausted. He supported the keeping of detailed minutes of all executive sessions and
offered to work with elected officials to clearly establish the point in time that executive session meeting
minutes will be made available to the citizens.
Discussion about Executive Sessions and the Consequences of Minutes/Notes
Council President Peterson explained there has been some question about what other cities in Washington
do/not do with regard to executive session minutes/notes, when those minutes/notes are made available to
public, pros and cons regarding attorney/client privilege and the concept of executive sessions.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday provided the following introductory comments: first, there is a clear distinction
between notes and minutes. Minutes may begin as notes but become minutes when the City Council has an
opportunity to review and vote to approve their accuracy and in some cases make revisions which may include
reviewing the audio of the meeting. Currently in executive session the City Clerk takes notes but those notes are
never reviewed/approved by the City Council so they do not have the status of minutes. Second, Mr. Taraday
was not aware of any other city in Washington that keeps notes of executive session. Municipal Research
Service Center (MRSC) recommends against that practice. Edmonds began keeping notes of executive sessions
in 1996 when Resolution 853 was adopted. Mr. Taraday read Resolution 853, Establishing a Procedure for
Keeping and Retaining Minutes of City Council Executive Sessions.
Packet Page Page 85 of 98
Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes
February 2-3, 2010
Page 3
Mr. Taraday pointed out that although the resolution uses the term “minutes,” he does not consider the Council’s
practice to be generating minutes. To the extent the Council deems that there is a public interest for making a
record of what takes place in executive session, that record should be as accurate as possible. If there is a desire
for a record, there should be an audio recording of executive sessions. Alternatively, the Council goes into
executive session for a reason; the reason is stated before the Council goes into executive session and it is an
executive session because it is a discussion that should not be public and no record should be made. Mr. Taraday
recommended the Council either make a full record or make no record; to do what the Council is doing now is
potentially misleading in that it is not possible to take down on paper everything that takes place in executive
session.
The Council raised the following suggestions/questions/topics (City Attorney’s response in italics):
• As an alternative to recording, keep notes of executive sessions and the Council review the notes and
possibly in the future call them minutes. The resolution seems to state the Council wants to ensure there
is a record stating the Council was in executive session for the right reason. There is no way to know
that an accurate record exists unless there is a recording to back up the notes. The Council also needs
to vote to approve minutes; the Council cannot vote in executive session. The Council could review the
minutes privately and then vote in open session to approve them. If there is an interest in a fully
accurate record of what takes place in executive session, the only way to ensure that is to record it.
• Why not record executive sessions? The City has always asserted that if the executive session is for the
purpose of discussing pending/potential litigation and the City Attorney is present, the notes taken
during executive session are attorney/client privilege protected and therefore are not subject to public
disclosure. However, there is no case law and there is no guarantee the court would rule that way.
Therefore in the absence of a more clear statute about note taking/minute taking/recording of executive
sessions, there is some risk that a court could rule that whatever record was made should be made
public. He would, of course, vehemently object to that effort and would argue that any record of a
discussion regarding pending/potential litigation should be treated as attorney work product or
attorney/client privilege and not subject to public disclosure.
• What topics are permissible for Executive Session and why don’t other cities take notes? The reason
other cities do not take notes is out of concern that the record cannot be protected from public
disclosure. Mr. Taraday reviewed the permissible bases for executive sessions contained in RCW
42.30.1101(1).
• The Council could continue its current practice but revise the resolution to conform to the current
practice. If the current practice is continued, Councilmembers have some protection because they do not
review or approve the notes taken of executive sessions. Mr. Taraday did not recommend continuing the
current practice because if the goal is an accurate, complete record, it should be a record that can be
verified later.
• There are some issues on the list of bases for an executive session that should not have any record kept;
the philosophy behind an executive session is to have an open discussion about sensitive issues such as
personnel, potential litigation, and those should never be revealed to the public. The Council could
record discussions regarding real estate matters; the Council could review and approve minutes in open
session and possibly release them in the future. The Council would not record or take notes of all other
executive session topics. The City Council could establish a policy to record certain types of executive
sessions. With regard to the approval of minutes, there is no exemption from the OPMA for approval of
executive session minutes; the City Council cannot go into executive session to discuss a change to
executive session minutes. MRSC recommends that minutes not be kept of executive sessions because a
public records request could be made for the minutes and there is no automatic exemption from
disclosure that applies.
• RCW 42.30.010 cited by Mr. Reidy states that the people of the state do not yield their sovereignty to
the agencies which serve them. The Council should take full and complete minutes and record executive
sessions and determine what can/cannot be revealed in the future. The risk of that approach is the
Packet Page Page 86 of 98
Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes
February 2-3, 2010
Page 4
executive session list of topics does not clearly say that a record of the executive session is not
disclosable under the Public Records Act.
• Why does Edmonds keep notes of executive sessions? MRSC recommends notes not be kept and most
cities do not. There is no legal need to takes notes to comply with state law; it is up to the Council
whether to preserve a record of executive sessions. It can be helpful in the future to check on topics the
Council has discussed in the past.
• Executive sessions give the Council an opportunity to have an open dialogue with staff. The philosophy
of executive sessions is to have a frank dialogue, a recording would minimize that.
• There may be short term reasons not to disclose executive session notes but not in the long term. If
Councilmembers know what they say could eventually be disclosed, they may be more thoughtful in
their questions and discussion. All executive session conversations should be disclosed in the future.
The public has a right to know the information unless it is confidential and private.
• Need to determine why other cities are not taking notes of executive sessions. The reason other cities do
not take notes is clear in the statement on MRSC’s website; there is no automatic exemption from
disclosure. There is the possibility even in the short term that a court could require disclosure of a
record the City Council thought would not be disclosed. A potential option would be to have the City
Attorney take notes. His notes would be easier to protect as they are an attorney work product.
• It would be unpractical to have discussion in executive session if Councilmembers have to think about
what could be released. Recording or taking minutes for only some topics would also be difficult. There
is the potential for a lawsuit with regard to any executive session topic and the Council has the fiduciary
responsibility to limit/reduce lawsuits. Prefer no minutes be kept of executive sessions.
It was the consensus of the Council to clarify, revise, rewrite the resolution. Council President Peterson will
schedule it for consideration by the full Council during the first half of the year and take public comment. He
asked Councilmembers to provide him their suggestions.
Budgeting by Priorities Presentation (working lunch)
Community Services/Economic Development Director Clifton explained one of the topics at an Association of
Washington Cities budget workshop was budgeting by priorities/budgeting for outcomes. Councilmember
Buckshnis, Citizen Darrol Haug and he and a few others then met with Redmond Finance Director Mike Bailey
who reinforced their interest in the concept and determining whether it would be an appropriate budgeting
process for Edmonds. Mr. Bailey, who is ill today, will be invited to conduct a workshop with the Council in the
future to describe what it was like for Redmond to implement budgeting by priorities, and how it was received
by the directors, elected officials and citizens.
Mr. Hunstock explained Redmond spent 1-2 years and $160,000 on consultants to put a budgeting by priorities
process in place. He referred to a handout from the Government Finance Officers Association regarding a
priority-driven budget process that is similar to budgeting by priorities. He provided an overview of budgeting
for outcomes:
1. Determine the “price of government” (total resources)
2. Determine priorities
a) Example: one of Redmond’s priorities was a safe place to work, play and live
3. Assign a portion of the “price” to each priority
4. Determine best way to delivery results by priority
a) Results Team develop strategies/RFOs
b) Program staff submits “offer (attempt to address goal), may be multi-department offer
c) Results teams rank/scale offers
5. Results budgeting is focused on strategies to accomplish priorities
Packet Page Page 87 of 98
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
March 20, 2012
Page 7
Association of Washington Cities and the District Municipal Court Judges Association are also working
on this.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked Judge Fair’s opinion about the recent Supreme Court decision to uphold
the use of red light cameras. Judge Fair answered he was not surprised because the legislature gave that
authority to the governing bodies in their enacting legislation. The dissenting opinion was that it was a
moot point because it has been resolved by the City Councils. In reality it was a good issue to resolve
because it has become a concern in many cities.
8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no members of the public who wished to provide comment.
9. FLOWER BASKET DONATION PROGRAM
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite announced a new program, Adopt a Flower Basket. She thanked
Councilmember Buckshnis for her assistance with launching the program and credited Jack Bevan for the
idea.
Ms. Hite distributed an Adopt a Flower Basket brochure. The program allows community members to
donate $100 in support of each of the City’s flower baskets. Each basket will have a name tag stating who
this basket was donated by or in memory of. Councilmember Buckshnis donated the first $100 in memory
of her dog, Buddy.
Ms. Hite also thanked Recreation Manager Renee McRae who worked closely with Councilmember
Buckshnis on this program.
10. DISCUSSION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
Council President Peterson explained this issue was discussed at the Council retreat. He explained there
are limited reasons under RCW for the Council to meet in executive session. There is legislation under
consideration regarding the recording of executive sessions and limiting what must be provided via a
Public Records Request.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday provided an overview of the issue. The Council adopted Resolution 853 in
1996 which is when the Council began taking notes during executive sessions. He emphasized the notes
that are currently taken are notes, rather than minutes. The distinction is minutes are reviewed and
approved at a subsequent meeting by the body conducting the meeting. While the notes taken of executive
sessions are generally accurate, they do not have a review and approval process. That is significant
because it does not provide an opportunity for a Councilmember to review them or request a change.
Mr. Taraday explained he has been uncomfortable with the current practice because in his opinion if the
Council records the meeting, it should be recorded completely with an audio recording so there would not
be any question regarding what really happened. The Council could then discontinue the practice of note
taking. He pointed out Edmonds is one of the few if not the only city in Washington who keeps notes of
executive sessions. It is up to the Council to decide whether to continue or change the current practice.
Council President Peterson commented his intent was to have a discussion; he did not foresee any action
tonight other than scheduling it on a future meeting agenda for public comment/public hearing and
potential action.
Packet Page Page 88 of 98
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
March 20, 2012
Page 8
Councilmember Bloom referred to SB 6109, recently passed by the Senate 39-9, exempting video and
audio recordings of executive sessions. She recognized the bill had not yet been finalized. Mr. Taraday
offered to research the progress of SB 6109 and comment later in the discussion. His understanding of SB
6109 was it may give Public Records Act protection from disclosure of executive session records. One of
his concerns with taking notes is that although an argument can be made that the notes are attorney-client
privileged or work product protected or both, there is not a clear exemption in the Public Records Act for
executive session notes.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested amending Resolution 853 because the current practice creates
notes, not minutes. Mr. Taraday agreed the Council either needed to change its practices to conform with
the resolution or change the resolution to conform to the practice. Councilmember Buckshnis advised she
was ready to do that tonight. Councilmember Bloom advised she was ready to begin recording executive
sessions now. Mayor Earling pointed out Council President Peterson’s intent that this item was for
discussion only.
Council President Peterson commented his discomfort with note taking, minute taking or recording
executive sessions was because an executive session was an opportunity for the Council and Mayor with
the City Attorney and preferably not the City Clerk to have a free flow of ideas and discussion on a
limited number of sensitive topics including litigation, personnel, and real estate. He understood citizens’
concerns that things might happen behind closed doors or that deals are being struck; the Council, Mayor
and City Attorney keep each other in check should the discussion drift off topic. He recognized there is
distrust in government, pointing out Washington was one of the first states to have a Public Records Act.
The topics that can be discussed in executive session are not intended for the public and that is one of the
reasons Councilmembers are elected. The ability for Councilmembers, Mayor and City Attorney to keep
each other in check ensures the system works.
Councilmember Bloom pointed out the RCWs address everything Council President Peterson said. The
RCW identifies when the Council can have an executive session rather than a public meeting. The
advantage of recording executive sessions is it would provide proof in the event of challenge. A judge
would then review the recording and determine whether the Open Public Meetings Act was violated. It
was her opinion that recording executive sessions would instill more trust. She concluded it was very
important for the Council to “show our work.”
Councilmember Buckshnis commented she was undecided about this issue but in light of the personnel
issues that occurred last year, feels note taking is the appropriate way to proceed in the future as they
provide a record. Audio recording may be problematic because some Councilmembers prefer to speak
less professionally in an executive session; that candor would not be possible if executive sessions are
recorded. She did not support recording executive sessions unless only notes could be taken for executive
session regarding personnel matters.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed recording executive sessions would reflect positively on
Councilmembers for the purposes of openness and transparency. Conversely, she questioned why
Edmonds is the only city currently taking notes. This may be a moot point depending on what the
legislature does.
Mr. Taraday explained SB 6109 has not yet passed the House. If it were signed into law it would exempt
video and audio recordings of executive sessions from disclosure under the Public Records Act. If
someone made a request for an audio recording of an executive session, under this exemption the City
would not be required to provide it. Currently if someone requests notes of an executive session, a
roundabout argument has to be made regarding why the notes should be exempt from disclosure. The bill
would provide an exemption for audio recordings but not for notes.
Packet Page Page 89 of 98
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
March 20, 2012
Page 9
Councilmember Yamamoto commented for each executive session he has attended, Councilmembers
know the topic in advance. The Council discusses only that topic and if anyone gets off track, another
Councilmember, the Mayor or the City Attorney brings them in check. He appreciated the opportunity for
Councilmembers to have a frank discussion; recording executive sessions could hamper that ability. He
clarified the Council only has discussions in executive session and does not make decisions.
Council President Peterson suggested the Council wait to see what the legislature does. There is currently
no hard and fast laws regarding what can be exempted under the Public Records Act with regard to
executive sessions. Until protection was provided, he was concerned that a Public Records Request could
require release of sensitive information. If SB 6109 is not passed into law, the Council can consider
amendments to the resolution.
11. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING EDMONDS CITY
CODE SECTION 10.75.030(A)(2), EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION SUNSET DATE, AND OTHER ITEMS RELATED TO THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained the Council packet
contains a draft ordinance and attachment which, if approved by the City Council, would amend ECC
Chapter 10.75 regarding the Economic Development Commission (EDC). The Council discussed
potential amendments on December 20, 2011, January 23, 2012 and March 6, 2012. During the March 6
meeting, the Council discussed four amendments:
• Section 10.75.030(A)(2): insert language that the EDC would focus primarily on economic
development related activities
• Section 10.75.030(A): extension of the sunset date of the EDC approximately 4 years to
December 31, 2015
• Section 10.75.010(B)(d): elected officials shall not be allowed to serve on the EDC but may serve
as non-voting ex-officio members. This would also apply to elected Port Commissioners.
• 10.750.030(C): staggering commission terms. Existing Commission members would be allowed
to serve through the end of the year. Commissioners have indicated their interest in continuing to
serve; approximately two-thirds expressed interest in remaining on the Commission. This will
ensure some continuity and institutional memory on the EDC. Staff will advertise immediately to
fill the remaining positions; terms filled this year would expire in 2014. Staff would re-advertise
at the end of the year and either new Commissioners or existing Commissioners could be
appointed. Appointments made in 2013 would expire at the end of 2015.
Mr. Clifton explained another option related to staggering is to have terms expire at the end of the
Councilmember’s term who appointed the Commissioner. City Attorney Jeff Taraday clarified in addition
to the ordinance, the Council needs to provide direction regarding staggering of Commissioners’ terms.
For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Clifton explained approximately 5-6 Commissioners have stated they
do not plan to continue serving on the EDC. Upon confirming existing members’ desire to continue
serving on the Commission, staff will advertise to fill the vacant positions. As the former Council liaison
on the EDC, Councilmember Buckshnis commented there are often less than a handful of Commissioner
present at EDC meetings. She suggested each Councilmember have an opportunity to appoint at least one
Commissioner.
As Chair of the former EDC, Councilmember Yamamoto clarified there was always a quorum present at
EDC meetings. Most Commissioners informed staff when they would be absent and the absences were
for legitimate reasons. He agreed there were a couple Commissioners who did not attend meetings
regularly or notify of their absence. He agreed with the proposal to stagger terms.
Packet Page Page 90 of 98
Minutes
Public Safety and Personnel Committee Meeting
June 12, 2012
Elected Officials Present: Councilmember Joan Bloom
Councilmember Kristiana Johnson
Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas
Staff Present: Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Councilmember Bloom.
A. Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force, 2012 – 2013 Interlocal
Agreement
Assistant Police Chief Gannon described the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force
(SRDGTF) Interlocal Agreement. In addition to the SRDGTF, he pointed out that Edmonds also
participates in the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force with the cities of Lynnwood
and Mountlake Terrace. The two task forces work closely and assist each other with staffing
and equipment. Mr. Gannon requested that the committee approve the placement of the
Interlocal Agreement on the City Council Consent Agenda.
Responding to questions from Councilmember Bloom concerning how the fees are calculated
for the Interlocal Agreement, Mr. Gannon stated the fees are based on population. Edmonds
fee is $9,939 for July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013 (a decrease of $59 over last year’s fee).
Councilmember Johnson had specific questions regarding the agreement which Mr. Gannon
responded to. In particular Councilmember Johnson asked questions pertaining to the
participation of certain cities/entities and why they were listed in the agreement. Mr. Gannon
clarified that the interlocal agreement originates from the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office.
Edmonds’ participation is just the funding. He stated that he would provide additional
information following this meeting to further respond to Councilmember Johnson’s questions.
Action: Assistant Chief of Police Gannon to provide additional information to the Committee.
The Committee approved placing the agreement on the City Council Consent Agenda.
B. Discussion Regarding Taking Minutes/Notes During Executive Session
Councilmember Bloom suggested in addition to discussing whether to take minutes/notes
during executive session, the discussion include whether executive sessions should be
recorded. She acknowledged there may be some executive sessions that should never be
recorded such as those regarding personnel.
Councilmember Bloom explained Resolution 853 states the Council takes minutes of executive
sessions and at some point the minutes will be available to the public if the reason for the
Packet Page Page 91 of 98
executive session has expired. The issue is staff takes summary notes which are not approved
by Council so they are not technically minutes.
A discussion with the residents who were present ensued. Their comments included the
following:
Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, asked whether Councilmembers Bloom and Johnson had reviewed
the materials from the Council retreat. Councilmember Johnson said she had and
Councilmember Bloom said she was present at the retreat. Mr. Wambolt pointed out Mr. Reidy
has done a great deal of research regarding this issue.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, acknowledged this was a complicated issue; taking minutes/notes was
important to him because he believes citizens would get better representation by their elected
officials and more honest government if the City Council and Mayor knew eventually the
minutes of Executive Sessions could be released to the public in certain situations. Resolution
853 requires minutes be kept; if minutes require an audio or video recording, executive sessions
should be recorded. Resolution 853 also addresses the concept of minutes being subject to
release when the reason for the executive session expires. He acknowledged Edmonds is
unique; he was not aware of any other cities that keep executive session minutes. This is an
opportunity to build trust in local governance and for Edmonds to be a leader in transparency.
He hoped the Council would go in that direction rather than to discontinue keeping
minutes/notes.
Diane Talmadge, Edmonds, commented a resolution was non-binding, she preferred the
requirement be contained in an ordinance. She felt tensions build when elected officials know
what occurs in executive sessions and citizens do not. Recording or minutes of executive
sessions would bring tensions into balance and elected officials would be aware that the
minutes could be released at a later date. If there are no recording/notes, executive sessions
seem like secret meetings. The people’s right to know is of greater importance than elected
officials’ right to discuss it without anyone looking. Ms. Talmadge said executive session
minutes would also allow Councilmembers to refresh their memory if necessary regarding what
was discussed in executive session. She wanted the public and the Council protected because
it ultimately saved the City money.
Damon Pistulka, Edmonds, commented a Councilmember could be presented information in
an executive session that is later contradicted. Without documentation, there is nothing to
substantiate the information provided in executive session. It was beneficial for all parties to
have notes/minutes of executive sessions, especially in litigation. Current and future
Councilmembers could also review notes/minutes of an executive session.
Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, suggested the City Attorney make a presentation at a Council
meeting similar to the presentation at the retreat, including addressing public comments that
have been made since that presentation. With regard to release of executive session
minutes/notes, he commented that although a litigation or real estate matter may have been
concluded, the City may use the same tactics and strategies in future negotiations/litigation;
having that information made public could be a disadvantage to the City. The reason for the
executive session and the passage of time are not the only criterion for releasing information.
Other issues to consider include preserving the attorney/client privilege in an executive session
and inadvertent disclosure if notes/minutes/recordings are kept of executive sessions. He
suggested the City Attorney’s presentation also clarify who is the client in executive sessions.
Packet Page Page 92 of 98
Mr. Reidy suggested also having a proponent of open government address the City Council in
addition to the City Attorney to provide a balanced viewpoint. Even if executive session minutes
are never released to the public, it is important to have executive sessions recorded and
detailed minutes kept.
Councilmember Bloom asked whether other cities record their executive session. City Clerk
Sandy Chase said Edmonds is the only city she knows of that takes minutes/notes of executive
sessions.
Mr. Reidy noted Resolution 853 was passed on September 16, 1996 on the Consent Agenda;
he asked whether there was any previous discussion. Ms. Chase recalled the City Council was
holding a number of executive sessions at the time and there were similar concerns expressed;
Resolution 853 was a response to the concerns at that time.
Councilmember Bloom referred to SB 6109 which would have required a judge to review the
audio recording if there was a public record request of an executive session to determine if it
was truly necessary to hold an executive session. She asked why the Senate proposed that bill
if other cities do not document their executive session. Ms. Chase stated her understanding that
it may be due to efforts by Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG) and others.
Mr. Pistulka commented executive session notes would be helpful regardless of whether they
are released. He cited the example of business board meeting notes that provide useful
information.
Councilmember Johnson observed there is a balance between the public’s right/need/desire to
know, risk assessment and the attorney/client privilege. Resolution 853 was a compromise in an
attempt to appease all parties. However, the language in the resolution does not necessarily
reflect the practice. Minutes require approval, notes do not. She suggested determining whether
to modify the resolution or the practice. She supported having a presentation from the City
Attorney on this subject at the full Council.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested having a presentation from AWC and WCOG as
well. Councilmember Johnson suggested MRSC as an additional resource.
Other topics discussed included increased frequency of executive sessions this year, redaction
of information in executive session minutes, the City Attorney’s presence at executive session,
and assessing risk.
Action: At next week’s meeting the City Attorney make a presentation, to be followed by
Council discussion with the goal of a future public hearing and further input from AWC, WCOG,
etc.
C. Public Comments
Public comment occurred during Agenda Item B.
Adjourn: 8:21 p.m.
Packet Page Page 93 of 98
Packet Page Page 94 of 98
Packet Page Page 95 of 98
Packet Page Page 96 of 98
Packet Page Page 97 of 98
Packet Page Page 98 of 98