Cmd111720EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
November 17, 2020
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brook Roberts, Student Representative
1. CALF TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Jim Lawless, Acting Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Mgr.
Dave Turley, Acting Finance Director
Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Mgr.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember K. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: "We acknowledge
the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We
respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection
with the land and water."
ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST,
TO MOVE ITEM STUDY ITEM 9.1, BUDGET REVIEW AND OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS
CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET, TO ACTION ITEM 8.3.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 1
Councilmember Buckshnis said she had not had an opportunity to submit all her questions. She wanted to
ensure Councilmembers as well as citizens had an opportunity to have their questions answered.
Councilmember K. Johnson objected to doing the budget review on a piecemeal basis. There needs to be
an opportunity to have the hearing, hear everyone's discussion and save the actual action for a future
meeting. She did not support Councilmember Paine's motion to change the agenda item to an action item
tonight as she thought that was inappropriate.
Council President Fraley-Monillas expressed support for Councilmember Paine's motion. There is
nothing that indicates what should, would, or could approach Council. She received multiple emails from
a Councilmember today about moving forward with items. If there are four votes for something, that's the
way it lands.
Councilmember Paine said she made the motion because there are opportunities the Council can take
advantage of now that are not overly controversial. She was always open to moving the discussion to a
future meeting if more discussion was needed.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was confused and hoped the intent was not to approve the budget as
the Council has not approved the CIP/CFP. She asked if the intent was action on Council amendments.
Councilmember Paine indicated that was her intent.
Councilmember K. Johnson observed Councilmember Paine's request was to make a study item an action
item. She asked if that meant action would be taken on the budget, although Councilmember Paine had
indicated that was not her intent. Councilmember Paine answered her intent was to make amendments to
the budget and vote on them tonight. For items that needed more discussion or were controversial, the
vote could occur at a future meeting. The amendments she planned to propose were not that controversial.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING
YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND OLSON VOTING NO.
UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (7-0), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS,
OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING YES.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments. He pointed out
the agenda includes three public hearings. This agenda item is for topics that are not public hearing.
There were no audience comments.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The
agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT
2. SEPTEMBER 2020 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 2
3. RENEWAL OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOHOMISH
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
4. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES ON THE CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT
5. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH
KPG FOR THE CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENTS
6. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH
WHPACIFIC FOR THE 84TH AVE OVERLAY PROJECT
7. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH TETRA TECH, INC. FOR DESIGN OF THE SEAVIEW PARK
INFILTRATION FACILITY PHASE 2 PROJECT
8. ONE -MONTH EXTENSION OF HOUSING COMMISSION
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
PUBLIC HEARING ON 184TH ST SW STREET VACATION AND OFFICIAL STREET
MAP CHANGE
Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien introduced Engineering Program Manager Jeanie
McConnell and recognized applicants, Brian Lindsey, a consultant, and Manjinder Josan, the property
owner. Mr. Lien explained this is a consolidated public hearing as there are two applications, a street
vacation for the easterly portion of 184"' Street SW, and an Official Street Map amendment for a planned
right-of-way between 80"' Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. Mr. Lien reviewed:
• Review and Applicable Codes
o Type V Legislative Decision
o For Street Map Amendment, Planning Board provides a recommendation to City Council
o Edmonds Community Development Code:
■ Chapter 15.05 Comprehensive Plan Purposes
• Chapter 15.40 Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan
• Chapter 18.50 — Official Street Map
• Chapter 20.01 Types of Development Project Permits
• Chapter 20.65 — Street Map Changes
x Chapter 20.70 — Street Vacations
• Site Map of Project Area
o Perrinville area
o Four properties associated with the application (highlighted in red on map)
o Area of Street Map Change
o Area of Street Vacation
Ms. McConnell reviewed a map of the project area that identifies:
• Official Street Map amendment area (identified in yellow), a planned 60-foot right-of-way with
connection from 80"' Avenue W to Olympic View Drive
• Approximate area of the 184" Street SW street vacation, right-of-way
• City Utilities (sewer, storm and water) between 80"' and Olympic View Drive
o Utilities meander in and out of planned right-of-way line
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 3
o Existing easements in the area are not shown on the map and do not entirely align with utility
locations
Map of Future Development of Property
0 184"' Street SW current right-of-way
o In a future development, additional right-of-way dedication would be required to meet
transportation and public safety needs (showed as red hatched on map)
o Potential right-of-way vacation area (green on map)
o Official Street Map Amendment area (yellow dashed line)
o Approximate location of City utility easements that would need to be reserved for water,
sewer and storm lines
Mr. Lien recalled questions had been raised regarding wiry the Official Street Map amendment and the
street vacation were being considered before the subdivision. He explained this is due to the different
review types:
* Project Context
1. Official Street Map — Type V Decision
2. Street Vacation — Type V Decision
3. Proposed future development — Type III -A quasi-judicial Decision
Review process —timing of 1-3:
ECDC 20.01.002 — when projects are not consolidated, the highest Type is processed first
o Official Street Map and street vacation are Type V, need to be processed prior to Type III
quasi-judicial decision on the subdivision
o There was a possibility for consolidated review, but there was concern with consolidating
legislative and quasi-judicial decisions as they are different processes. Decision was to follow
t he code to consider tl�c Type V before the Type 1I1.
Staff proposed timeline:
o Review per code
o Approval timed to align with development proposal
Outline of Process if Council approves the street vacation and the Official Street Map amendment
l . City Council adopts a Resolution of Intent to Vacate and Approve Street Map Change with
conditions
a. Requires submittal of the subdivision application
b. Easements presented to City for utilities highlighted on map and a pedestrian easement to
connect 184"' to Olympic View Drive
2. Applicant submits formal subdivision application — decision by Hearing Examiner after a
public hearing. If subdivision application preliminary approved by the Hearing Examiner, the
following process continues:
3. Ordinance for Street Vacation and Street Map Change presented to Council for adoption.
Effective date of ordinance tied to final approval of subdivision and recording
4. Civil Review of Subdivision
5. Final Subdivision Review and Approval
a. City Council review of dedication and easements
6. Subdivision, ordinance for vacation and Official Street Map change recorded
Ms. McConnell reviewed:
Official Street Map Change
o Chapter 20.65 ECDC establishes criteria of approval
■ Chapter 15.05 ECDC —Comprehensive Plan
— Property is designated Single Family — Resource. This proposal is consistent.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 4
- Adequate right-of-way exists along 80"' Avenue W and the portions of 184" Street
SW to provide transportation needs to the area.
- Pedestrian connection has been identified as a need in this area from 80t" Avenue W
to Olympic View Drive in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
- Any development proposal would require 30% native vegetation retention
■ Chapter 15.40 ECDC -Comprehensive Street Plan
- Current planned right-of-way line 60-feet width from 80"' Avenue W to Olympic
View Drive would have to be dedicated to the City as right-of-way with any future
development.
- Staff review of the Transportation Element and current corridors, 80th Avenue W is a
collector street that connects 196"' to Olympic View Drive, maintaining that travel
path and not creating a cut -through street helps meet the comprehensive street plan
needs
• Chapter 18.50 ECDC -Official Street Map
- Meets the transportation needs along 80"' Avenue W and pedestrian connection
provided.
Street Vacation
o ECDC 20.70.020 Criteria for Vacation
■ The vacation is in the public interest
- Applicant provided an appraisal of the area that identified while the street vacation
area is limited to approximately 2,200 square feet, the additional area could provide
some flexibility regarding where homes are placed
- Current 184' Street SW right-of-way is a direct alignment between 80"' Avenue W
and Olympic View Drive with very steep slopes. City desires a pedestrian connection
in that area but slope may not be feasible. Via this process City could reserve an
easement in a more desirable location for pedestrian access between 80"' Avenue W
and Olympic View Drive
- Area to be vacated is not needed for transportation or utility
■ No property will be denied direct access as a result of the vacation
- Sufficient right-of-way provided in area, street vacation is limited and not result in
any property losing access
o ECDC 20.70.040 Limitations on Vacations
■ Applies to vacations abutting a body of water
- Does not abut a body of water
■ Vacation shall not proceed when written objection is received by 50 percent or more
abutting property owners
- Applicant owns 100% of the abutting property so no written objection
• Staff Recommendation
o Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Official Street Map Change and Street Vacation, with
conditions. Not seeking Council decision tonight.
■ City Code requires applicant to comply with conditions that are establish within 90 days
of approval of the resolution of intent to vacate
Conditions include a requirement for the applicant to submit a subdivision development
application.
Moratorium Ordinance No. 4200 does not allow acceptance of subdivisions under certain
circumstances, which apply here.
* Should the Council approve the proposal, the Resolution of Intent will be presented to
Council following expiration of the moratorium or approval of a revised Tree Code.
• Staff Recommendation (conditions of approval)
o Official Street Map Change:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 5
■ Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Official Street Map Change to eliminate the 60-ft
wide planned right-of-way line north of 184t" St SW, between 80"' Ave W and Olympic
View Drive with the following conditions to be included in the resolution of intent to
amend the official street map:
1. Application for a subdivision must be submitted to the City of Edmonds
2. Applicant shall convey and deliver to the City for future recording public utility
easements required for existing and/or relocated city storm, water & sewer utilities
3. Approval of the street map change does not guarantee or infer approval of the
subdivision planned for the subject property as shown in Attachment 5.
o Street Vacation.
■ Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Street Vacation request to vacate an easterly
portion of 184" Street SW, between 80t" Avenue W and Olympic View Drive with the
following conditions to be included in the resolution of intent to vacate:
1. Application for a subdivision must be submitted to the City of Edmonds.
2. Applicant shall convey and deliver to the City for future recording a public pedestrian
easement required for connection between 80"' Avenue W and Olympic View Drive
3. Approval of an intent to vacate does not guarantee or infer approval of the
subdivision planned for the subject property as shown in Attachment 5.
Ms. McConnell explained the reason for delaying recording is to ensure the location of the easements
align with the infrastructure/improvements. Recording of the easements would occur when the
subdivision is recorded.
Development Services Director Shane Hope reiterated there is no request for action tonight. This is an
opportunity for a public hearing and to determine if anything needs to be resolved prior to bringing back a
Resolution of Intent in the future.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed the Planning Board minutes are dated April 24, 2019 and some of the
members at that time are no longer on the Planning Board. She asked if the Planning Board reviewed this
in 2020. Mr. Lien answered the Planning Board public hearing on the Street Map change was held in
2019. A public hearing was initially planned on the Street Map change and the vacation in 2019, but
further review found more information was needed on the future development to determine where the
easements and vacation should be so another resolution was adopted that postponed that public hearing.
Staff and the applicant considered future development to determine where the vacation and easements
should be. Once that was ready to present to Council in early 2020, it postponed due to COVID. A public
hearing was scheduled in October, but issues with public notice resulted in rescheduling to tonight. He
summarized that was the reason for the delay between the Planning Board public hearing on the map
change and the public hearing on both the map change and the vacation. The Planning Board does not
hear or make a recommendation on the vacation; the code only requires the Planning Board hear and
make a recommendation on the Official Street Map change.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled Mr. Lien said the Planning Board approved the recommendation
unanimously, but it appeared they were talking about comprehensive changes and not the vacation. Mr.
Lien said the vacation does not go to the Planning Board, only the map change. Councilmember
Buckshnis observed there is no current Planning Board information other than the 2019 public hearing
where only one person commented.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mr. Lien and Ms. Hope for answering his questions via email. He
asked what opportunities exist for the property owner if the applications are denied. Ms. Hope said
development would still be allowed and could occur.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 6
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, stating she was having difficulty hearing Mr. Lien.
Mr. Lien adjusted his microphone.
Mr. Lien displayed the Future Development Map and explained should the Council deny both the Street
Map change and the vacation, the applicant could still apply for a subdivision on the property. As Ms.
McConnell mentioned, a subdivision application requires areas on the Official Street Map to be dedicated
to the City so instead of future right-of-way, it becomes right-of-way which removes that area from the
property. Given the size of this property, slightly over 5 acres and the R-12 zoning, a straight up area
calculation results in the potential of 17 lots. If the Council denies the vacation and that area comes out of
the proposal, a straight up area calculation would be 16 lots on the site although lots 1, 4 and 5 would be
greatly impacted. The lots could potentially be shifted around and result in an 11-12 lot subdivision if the
street map change and the vacation were denied. Regardless of whether the Council approves or denies
the map change and the vacation, when the site is developed, 30% of the site will need to be set aside i
native vegetation. Almost 1.5 acres would be set aside in native vegetation with or without the street map
change and vacation.
Councilmember Distelhorst referred to Ms. Hope's comment that no action was requested tonight and
asked if there was a time limit on the application that the Council needs to act on. Mr. Lien answered the
Council normally does not make a decision on a public hearing night. The Council could wait until the
moratorium ends and the tree code is finished and consider it at that time or as an interim step after
Council agendas lighten up, staff could bring it back for further discussion at the beginning of 2021
before the moratorium ends to seek Council direction. If the Council chooses not to move forward, that
decision could be made at that time. If the Council agrees with staff s recommendation, the Resolution of
Intent would be presented to Council once the moratorium is removed.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if the 30% would be per lot as it is subdivided not the entire property.
Mr. Lien answered the 30% applies to the entire property. The applicant could choose to have 30% on
each lot or group it into a different area. It would probably be in the steep slope area where development
is not desired and would help maintain the trees. Each lot does not have to have 30% native vegetation,
just development of the entire property needs to maintain 30% native vegetation.
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing.
Rebecca Wagner said it was important to her that Edmonds stand up to its commitment to being a Tree
City USA and being an environmentally aware city. Edmonds was one of the first cities in Washington to
commit to 100% renewable energy by 2025; however, in looking around the City, she does not see a
commitment to maintaining large tree canopy. She has heard people talk about urban trees versus non -
urban trees, but the beauty of Edmonds is that there are still some wild places. This development will
substantially impact the ability of people in the neighborhood and in Edmonds to enjoy the benefits of
large trees and the protection of potential salmon bearing streams. This kind of development benefits one
landowner and 14 potential luxury homeowners and it is hypocritical to say we are tree people and
sustainable people. She hoped the City Council would stand up for the City's future as a sustainable city
and oppose development in this area.
Kathleen Sears, Edmonds, an Edmonds resident for 61 years, urged the Council to vote no on the 184t"
Street SW vacation and the Official Street Map change. She viewed this as a relatively straight forward
decision based on the answer to the question, would this Street Map change benefit the public good in
some important way, would it improve the health of the watershed, expand the fragile wildlife corridors,
or increase the economic diversity of housing in Edmonds? The answer is no and the beneficiary of this
action would not be the public, the taxpaying citizens of Edmonds, but a private property
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 7
owner/developer. For that reason, when this comes to Council for a vote, the only appropriate and ethical
vote is no and she urged the Council to vote no.
Brian Lindsay, owner of BRL Services, LLC, explained they have gone to great lengths to achieve LID
development standards where all the runoff is infiltrated to the natural ground onsite thereby recharging
the aquifer of the site. They will maintain at least 1 `/2 acres of trees outside the right-of-way lines of the
project. The development area is actually quite small compared to the size of the 12,000+ square foot lots.
They are also providing a future pedestrian access which will be done to ADA standards that will zigzag
down to Olympic View Drive via the construction of small retaining walls. By not including the 60-foot
right-of-way, the City still has total rights of that land. The City owns a parcel that undoubtedly needs this
easement. They will still provide a connection but only for walking purposes and will have a very small
footprint on each lot.
Lora Hein, Edmonds, said this winter is expected to be a La Nina with colder and wetter conditions in
the Pacific NW. Although the long term future is uncertain, the impacts of climate change are ramping up
to a cascading effect that will be difficult to mitigate even if carbon net zero can be achieved, an
increasingly unlikely scenario. A recent scientific report predicts the only chance of mitigating runaway
temperature increases globally due to the melting of arctic ice and permafrost will be to implement
massive carbon sequestration efforts. At this time the most effective way to sequester carbon is in the
form of plant matter, especially trees. The very last thing that should be allowed is removal of any more
of the existing trees than absolute necessary. Another item on tonight's agenda is the infiltration project at
Seaview Park; the agenda packet states, Perrinville Park has been a routine maintenance issue for the City
Stormwater Division and continues to push large amounts of sediment through the stream corridor. High
velocities of this highly urbanized stream lead to excessive erosion along the steep sandy bluffs which
border much of the stream corridor. She said it appears counter intuitive to further denude the slopes of
the Perrinville Creek watershed by handing over currently forested City land to a private developer
without considering the long-term consequences of potential tree removal.
Ms. Hein said the standard practice of developers in Edmonds is to removing 100% of the vegetation,
scrapping off the topsoil to bare mineral soil followed by attempts to stave off erosion with jute netting
tubes along the perimeter and minimal replanting of young vegetation. Requiring a 30% retention of
vegetation is insufficient. She was alarmed that this application would be considered much less approved
in light of the recently imposed moratorium on tree removal and permitting of development. Additionally,
creating discontinuity for wildlife between wooded areas is ill advised. She implored the Council to put
this decision on hold until updated tree regulations can be adopted. Although the submission of
application for this project may be delayed until the moratorium concludes, in her experience once an
approval process gets underway, it becomes more difficult to halt its progress. She requested the Council
consider the long term consequences before making a decision that will impact future generations and the
health of the natural environment including Puget Sound and anadromous fish.
Hearing no further public testimony, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, whether the Council would discuss this item. Mayor
Nelson answered the Council had spent an extensive amount of time on this subject and he was trying to
keep the meeting on track. This will come back to the Council. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if it will
come back to the Council this year. Mayor Nelson said that was unknown; he was frustrated when an
issue from a previous administration appeared on an agenda.
Councilmember Olson referred to packet page 189 and the assertion that the pedestrian walkway is
basically received in exchange for the value of the property. She felt what that property meant to the
community had been undervalued if the applicants were not required to pay for a street vacation. This is a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 8
60-foot wide easement with a lot of very significant trees. If the City does not give up the easement, then
the 30% that needs to be maintained on other lots is in addition to what doesn't end up getting included in
that sum. Personally, she would assess the value differently than staff did. The loss of canopy in the
critical area got her attention, the extraordinary amount of slope and the proximity of the Perrinville
watershed. She recognized the value of the pedestrian walkway, something the City is not paying for
themselves, but there is a cost to the City of the extra stormwater impact. She heard and trusted the desire
to do a great job with the stormwater runoff, but it is an area with a lot slope, sloughing and beavers and is
a very sensitive area. The Council needs to be very thoughtful about how it values the added landscape
that can be maintained by not approving the vacation.
Councilmember Buckshnis said even with the Planning Board's April 24, 2019 deliberation, the City has
not proven that the vacation or the Street Map amendment is in the best interest of the public. She was
ready to vote any time this year.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented it appears Councilmembers are debating the issue at this
point. She had no problem with the Council making a motion to approve or deny. She had some concern
with moving forward, but it was up to the Council as it only takes four votes to make a decision.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO DENY BOTH THE STREET VACATION AND THE STREET MAP CHANGE
FOR THIS PROJECT.
Councilmember Olson said she was comfortable voting, but as a matter of process, the Council heard new
things today and it was better process to put it on next week's agenda so Councilmembers can think about
it and allow citizens who were unable to call in or who heard something new today to be able to reach out
to the Council. She preferred not to vote tonight as she felt it was not good government.
Councilmember Paine relayed she received in excess of 70, possibly as many as 90, emails from the
community, all of them requesting the Council deny this application based on public interest. A lot of the
concerns were environmental which was a compelling reason for her motion to deny.
Council President Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember Paine. The minute Councilmembers
began making statements on the debate, it puts the issue on the floor. Because it was put on the floor
versus waiting for debate to occur at a future meeting, it is appropriate for Council to weigh in.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, commenting since this was a public hearing and
Councilmembers are stating their opinions, how was that considered debate and moving it forward versus
contributing to the public hearing. Mayor Nelson advised the public hearing had been closed.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he was prepared to vote tonight. He hoped residents truly understood that
this action did not prevent development of this site, it only prevented certain aspects of it.
Councilmember K. Johnson said as a general rule, it is better for the Council to wait a week when there is
a public hearing because it provides an opportunity for Councilmembers to hear input as well as an
opportunity for others to comment. Regardless of whether she was ready to vote or which way she
planned to vote, that was a best practice for the Council.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she heard what was being said about best practices and not voting the
same night. However, in this case it is becoming clear where Councilmembers stand. She did not receive
even one email that supported the proposal; it was overwhelmingly opposed. The direction the Council is
headed is clear and she questioned dragging it out any further. There is a time component for the Council,
the developer and staff. She was prepared to vote tonight.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 9
Mr. Lien explained findings are required for the Council's decision. He read from 20.70.140 Final
Decision on a Street Vacation, Findings Required: as part of each ordinance granting a vacation, motion
denying a vacation, or Resolution of Intent to Vacate, the City Council shall adopt findings and
conclusions to support its decision. Mr. Lien said he was hearing that the Council generally favors denial.
If that is the intent, staff can bring back findings at a future meeting for Council consideration. City
Attorney Jeff Taraday said staff could draft finding and conclusions for the Consent Agenda;
Councilmembers could pull it for discussion if desired. Based on the Council's comments, the logical
next step would be to draft findings that support denial and that vote would be the official vote. Any vote
taken tonight would just be preliminary.
Councilmember Paine Council observed the Council could vote tonight and have findings and
conclusions presented on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Taraday agreed, any action tonight is direction to staff
regarding what to provide.
Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated the proposal is not in the best interest of the public. With regard to
the governance issue, this administration inherited this, it has been coming back for a number of years. A
lot of information has been gleaned over the last month due to delaying the public hearing for a month.
She was prepared to vote but respected the fact that Councilmembers Olson and K. Johnson wanted a
week to hear from people. During a pandemic people are anxious and worried; the Council received a lot
of emails. She preferred to provide a decision so everybody can rest assured.
Council President Fraley-Monillas observed there is a motion on the floor and the Council has heard from
probably everyone they need to hear from in the 70 emails in opposition.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED TO MOVE THE QUESTION FOR THE
MOTION ON THE FLOOR FORWARD. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5),
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING YES;
AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L.
JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A PROPOSED
DENIAL FOR NEXT WEEK WITH ALL THE REASONS AND PUT ON THE AGENDA.
Mr. Taraday advised there is already a motion pending to deny both proposals. Councilmember K.
Johnson's motion could be construed as an amendment to have staff bring back formal documents to deny
both next week. Councilmember K. Johnson said that was her intent, to make the decision next week.
Councilmember L. iohnsnn asked if the. motion wnidd he. to have. it on_ the Consent Agenda or on the
agenda for discussion and action. Councilmember K. Johnson answered her motion did not make that
distinction. Councilmember Olson said her second assumed it would be on Consent. Councilmember K.
Johnson said that was implied in the comments by Mr. Lien and Mr. Taraday, but she did not make that
distinction. Councilmember L. Johnson requested clarification prior to voting.
Councilmember Olson said the intent of her second was it would be on the Consent Agenda.
Mr. Lien said he is on vacation next week. Having it on the Consent Agenda would be appropriate as long
as it stays on the Consent Agenda and no further input from him was needed. Councilmember K. Johnson
said that was acceptable to her.
Councilmember K. Johnson clarified her amendment was to place it on the Consent Agenda.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 10
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING
NO.
2. PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2021 PROPOSED CITY BUDGET
Acting Finance Director Dave Turley reviewed:
• Why are we having this presentation tonight?
o RCW 35.33.057 states that "Prior to the final hearing on the budget, the legislative body or a
committee thereof, shall schedule hearings on the budget or parts thereof"
• What is the purpose?
o When putting a budget together, we start with understanding our Revenues. One purpose of
this presentation is to help you understand City revenues to help us make expenditure
decisions, another is to give you context later this evening when you decide whether to
increase our property tax levy by 1%.
o To do this I would like to start by giving you some context on the GF budget and its part of
the City-wide budget.
• 2021 Revenue Budget $102 Million
o City has 34 funds
o Highlight
• Water, Storm and Sewer related funds (enterprise funds) $46.5 million
■ Fleet and IT (Internal Service Funds)
■ Debt Service
• Misc. Special Revenue and Fiduciary Funds
■ Parks Construction
• Street Maintenance
• Street Construction
■ REET $2.6 million
• General Fund $42.7 million
• Graph of General Fund Revenues (with and without transfers -in) 2016-2019 actual, 2020 estimate
and 2021 budget
o Pretty consistent over the last several years
o This stability helps when making a 2021 forecast
o COVID however has made this more unpredictable
• General Fund Revenues (page 25 of budget book)
o About 74% of GF revenues are made up of Property Taxes and Sales Taxes
o Property Taxes — predictable and consistent
o Sales Taxes — unpredictable and volatile
• General Fund Revenues - Property Taxes (-35%)
o Extremely predictable and consistent
o Presentation to follow later this evening
• General Fund Revenues — Sales taxes (-39%)
o Retail Sales Tax — 22%
o Other Sales Taxes (Utilities, Criminal Justice, Leasehold) — 17%
o In general we have been following State OFM guidance
o So far in 2020 our forecasts have been reasonably accurate
o Graph of U.S. retail and food services sales
it US retail and food service sales in September were 1.9% above their August level
o Graph of Consumer Spending, year over year change U.S. and Washington
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page l 1
■ Since May, WA consumer spending has grown in all but four weeks on a year over year
basis
■ General Fund Revenues - All Sales Taxes (-39%)
o Retail sales and use tax makes up ---22% of the General Fund
o For the nine months ended 9/30, we are only 5% behind budget and 6% behind last year
o Graph of Sales and Use Tax 2020 actual, budget and prior year
General Fund Revenues - Other (-26%)
o These are things like charges for services, fines and penalties, grants, and other misc.
* Development Services - Building permits and related fees
■ Parks - Program fees for things like classes
■ Outside Revenues - Agreements with Woodway and Edmonds School District
K Distributions from the State (e.g. liquor and marijuana taxes) - 88 revenue line items in
total
o In general, in preparing the 2021 Proposed Budget, we have reduced our forecasts for these
revenues, and correspondingly reduced related expenses
General Fund Revenues and Budget Planning
o What you need to know:
* COVID - will be with us for all of 2021, we have prepared a budget intended to deal with
this for the long-term. Vaccine will help, but it will take time.
■ Forecasting - Our actual results have fallen in line with projections that we have made
■ Trends - Our revenues remain strong, though we do not expect 2021 to show the same
growth we have seen over the last 10 years
■ Stimulus Packages - Nationally and locally, federal government stimulus packages have
had a positive impact on keeping the economy going. The City has given out about $1.5
million in CARES funds to Edmonds businesses and individuals
in Budget for 202.1 - we are hoping for the best, but planning for the worst. What does this
mean?
- Hoping for the best - In general, we have reduced our revenue forecasts compared to
what we would predict in the absence of COVID, though not to disaster levels
- Planning for the worst - Through a very painful budget process, the Mayor has made
significant expenditure cuts. If City revenues exceed our forecasts, then there is the
hope and expectation that we will be able to add back some of these cuts
Mr. Turley explained this is a presentation and public hearing only, no Council action is requested
tonight. The purpose is to inform Council and the public and help make future decisions on the budget.
Mayor Nelson opened the public participation portion of the hearing. There was no public testimony and
Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the September Quarterly Financial Report indicated General Fund
revenues are only 6.9% behind budget and expenditures are under budget by 14%. She asked if the
Strategic Outlook that includes total revenues and expenditures would be updated. She recalled the
projections in July were more doom and gloom. Mr. Turley said he could update those estimates.
Councilmember Buckshnis said it was important to a lot of people because things have changed favorably
between July and September. Mr. Turley cautioned although the forecasts were optimist for a few months,
returning to Phase 1 leaves a lot of unknowns.
Councilmember Olson referred to DP #35 and #11, explaining one of her greatest concerns budget wise
was the $9 million backlog in building maintenance. She recalled a large leak in City Hall this fall that
caused a lot of damage. That leak was not unanticipated because there were issue with the building's
pipes and deferred maintenance can result in greater expense. She accepted that the proposed budget
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 12
included $500,000 which is 1/3 of the intended and typical budget to chip away at the backlog which is
probably not enough. She suggested the Economic Development Commission could look at how the City
is utilizing resources and how it could ever catch up on building maintenance. The $500,000 proposed in
the budget actually ends up being reduced by funds that were already set aside in past budgets as
represented by DP #I1, a building maintenance fund from past years. Instead of putting that money
toward building maintenance it went into the General Fund which means the $500,000 stated in the
budget as new funding for building maintenance is actually less than $300,000. She wanted to ensure the
City was at least doing $500,000 in building maintenance that on the surface looked like was being done.
She has been looking for money to fund that and has some ideas.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, pointing out this agenda item was regarding revenue.
Mayor Nelson agreed.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was unsure this was the time to start make amendments.
Although it only takes four votes to make any change the Council wants, this item is a report. She asked
when Mayor Nelson expected the Council would begin to discuss amendments. Mr. Turley advised Item
9.1 which became 8.3 is an opportunity for budget deliberation. The Council could begin making
amendments tonight during that agenda item or discuss the budget and wait until next week to make
amendments.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said it appeared the November 241" agenda was the opportunity to
make amendments to the budget. Recognizing the Council can do what it wants, she said getting more
information is a healthy thing for Council. Mr. Turley said whether amendments are made tonight is up to
the Council; it does not need to be done tonight.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested proceeding with the next public hearing and working through the
items on the agenda items and using whatever time is left to deliberate on the budget.
3. PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX
ORDINANCES
Acting Finance Director Dave Turley reviewed:
■ Why are we having this presentation tonight?
o RCW 84.55.120 States that we must "hold a public hearing on revenue sources for the
district's following year's current expense budget." (General Fund)
0 What is the purpose?
o In our case, Property Taxes make up about 35% of GF budget. One significant purpose of this
presentation is to give you context when you decide whether to increase our property tax
levies by 1 %.
Introduction:
o Washington State property tax laws are among the most complicated in the entire country.
o There are many sources with more details on the intricacies of Washington State property tax
laws. One very good, concise description can be found at: http://mrsc.org/Home/Explore-
Topics/Finance/Revenues/The-Property-Tax-in-Washington-State.aspx
o Brief history of Property Taxes in Washington:
■ 20 years ago the legislature passed a law limiting tax growth in response to I-747
■ The public believed government spending was out of control and wanted to limit growth.
At that time, property taxes could increase as much as inflation.
■ To limit revenue, cities and counties were allowed the levy the same amount as last year
plus construction automatically and 1%/year regardless of inflation and Council has to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 13
formally ask for the 1%. If inflation is less than 1%, the Council must pass a resolution
stating substantial need.
■ Pie Chart of Percentage General Fund Revenue by Type (Page 25 of budget book)
o Property Taxes makeup about $15 million, or 35% of the General Fund budget
■ Pie Chart of Property Tax Rates by Jurisdiction (Page 27 of budget book)
o Property Taxes that go to the City of Edmonds make up only 14.6% of the property tax bill
paid by the typical Edmonds homeowner
Graph of Property Tax Levies 2013-2021
o Total Amount Levied (2013-2019 actual, 2020 approved and 2021 estimated)
o Levy % Increase (2013-2019 actual, 2020 approved and 2021 estimated)
o The City's tax levy may only increase up to 1% per year except for, 1) tapping banked
capacity, or 2) approving an excess levy or a levy lid lift.
In 2014-2016 the City levied extra money to pay for debt service on the Public Safety
Building
• Property Tax Decisions for tonight: Does Council wish to increase either the Regular Property
Tax Levy or the EMS Levy by 1% over last year? (Amounts and calculations provided by County
Assessor)
Regular Property
Tax with 0%
Regular Property
Tax with 1%
Amount levied last year
$10,530,285
$10,530,285
Add 1%
105,303
Add New construction
25,542
25,542
Refunds and other Assessor Adjustments
60,173
60,870
ESTIMATED Leyy for 2021
$10,616,000
$10,722,000
V Re"ven ue from the current expense levy (Regular Property Tax Levy) is unrestricted, It can be
spent on anything.
EMS Property
Tax with 0%
EMS Property
Tax with 1%
Amount levied last year
$4,112,651
$4,112,651
Add 1%
41,127
Add New construction
9,976
9,976
Refunds and other Assessor Adjustments
43,700
44,165
ESTIMATED Levy for 2021
$4 166 327
$4 207,919
o Revenue from the EMS Property Tax Levy can be used only for emergency medical care or
emergency medical services — in this case it supports the Fire District contract
o Limiting these to the amount of inflation (0.602%) would provide increases of $63,392 and
$24,758.
o Banked capacity for the Regular Levy exists in the amount of $276,716.
Mr. Turley explained after the public hearing, Council needs to discuss the alternatives and decide on 1%
or 0% increases on both the Regular and EMS levies. If council wishes, they can make a decision tonight
and put that decision on next week's Consent Agenda. Staff has to inform the County Assessor of the
decision by November 30. Staff's recommendation is to approve a 1% increase to the EMS Levy, a 0%
increase to the Regular Levy, and approve the Resolution for Substantial Need. Staff s recommendation is
reflected in the budget.
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing on the proposed property tax ordinances. There was no public
testimony and Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 14
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled in past years, the Council has voted to bank capacity and a 0%
increase. She asked the City's total banked capacity. Mr. Turley answered the banked capacity is
$276,716. Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the Council had access to that at any time. Mr. Turley said
the Council could request that as part of the property tax ordinance. Councilmember K. Johnson asked if
the Council would have access to it if it was needed during 2021. Mr. Turley answered that choice can
only be made once a year.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled that banked capacity was from 2016 and 2019. She asked why staff
did not recommend banking this year's capacity. Mr. Turley said he did recommend banking the capacity
and that would be part of the ordinance.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how much using banked capacity would cost an average citizen.
Mr. Turley answered the regular levy is $105,000 and that cost the average homeowner $7/year. If the
entire banked capacity was used this year, it would cost $18-19/year per property. For example, if a
homeowner's property taxes were $4,000, they would be $4,007 with a 1% increase. Council President
Fraley-Monillas said this is regressive taxation on those that cannot afford the taxes and she could not
support regressive taxation.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if the City customarily added 1% to the EMS Levy to keep up with the
fire service increase or has that capacity been banked in the past. Mr. Turley answered for the past 6-8
years, the City has taken the 1%. Councilmember L. Johnson asked if the City had added 1% to the
regular levy in the past. Mr. Turley answered the 1% was not levied for the past two years but it was
levied the three years before that. He only looked back five years.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED TO NOT SUPPORT A PROPERTY TAX
INCREASE. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN BANKING THE FUNDS AS IT CAN BE PERCEIVED
AS BEING REGRESSIVE IN TAXATION.
Mayor Nelson restated the motion as follows:
TO APPROVE A 0% PROPERTY TAX INCREASE AND 0% BANKING. MOTION DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
With regard to banking, Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding that there was no requirement
to use it in the future, it was just insurance. Mr. Turley agreed, banking is allowed to make it easier to
justify taking not increase in a year.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed support for not increasing taxes this year but having the option to
bank the capacity.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
NOT TAKE A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE BUT TO BANK THE CAPACITY.
City Clerk Scott Passey said there are two ordinances proposed for adoption; the motions do not address
the ordinances.
Councilmember L. Johnson restated the motion:
TO BANK THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND NOT LEVY AN INCREASE.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised the ordinance requested by the motion, combining a 0% increase and
banking the capacity, is not in the packet and would need to be brought back on Consent. Mr. Turley
agreed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 15
Councilmember L. Johnson restated the motion:
TO HAVE THE ORDINANCES PREPARED FOR CONSENT. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR
THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY CONTINUING THE EMS PROPERTY TAX LEVY AT 101% OF
THE CURRENT LEVY LIMIT, PRESERVING FUTURE LEVY CAPACITY, AND FIXING A
TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if that increased taxes and if so, by how much. Mr. Turley
answered increasing the EMS Levy by 1% would increase taxes by approximately $4/year.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, AND PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if the Council needed to pass the Resolution for Substantial Need. Mr.
Turley answered yes.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, FINDING SUBSTANTIAL NEED TO LEVY PROPERTY TAXES
USING A LIMIT FACTOR OF ONE HUNDRED AND ONE PERCENT NOTWITHSTANDING A
LOWER NATIONAL INFLATION RATE. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
8. ACTION ITEMS
1. ADOPTION OF 2020 COMPREIENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
Planning Manager Rob Chave described the two amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map:
• Haines Wharf— changes property designation from Mixed Use Commercial to Open Space.
o Approved by City Council on September 1, 2020.
o Essentially implements the Shoreline designation of Aquatic 1.
• Perrinville — changes a property currently designated Neighborhood Commercial to Multifamily
Residential - Medium Density
o Approved by Council on November 2, 2020
Mr. Chave explained the ordinance in the packet would implement the two changes. The only other
Comprehensive Plan change this year is the Capital Facilrties Element ,a✓hich will be considered With
budget within the next month.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON,
TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING
THE 2020 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not support the Comprehensive Plan amendment in Perrinville so
she will not support the motion.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, OLSON,
PAINE, AND L. JOHNSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 16
2. CHIEF OF POLICE - REQUEST TO CONSIDER TWO CANDIDATES
HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson explained this is a request to approve moving forward with two
candidates for the position of Police Chief. The code requires three candidates but includes an exemption
to request two. This item is to request that exemption. She explained the position of Chief of Police was
posted for one month. Three candidates were selected to move forward. When the candidates were
notified of the interviews, one candidate dropped out. The position was posted for another three weeks in
hopes of garnering enough qualified applications to have three candidates. The additional three weeks
only resulted in five more applicants, none of whom were qualified for the position. She requested
Council approval to move forward with the two candidates that the Council has already interviewed.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
THAT BASED ON THE SAFETY INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY BEING MET BY THE
TWO CANDIDATES BROUGHT FORWARD, THAT THERE'D BE NO NEED TO LOOK
FURTHER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked Mayor Nelson when he planned to bring forward his choice.
Mayor Nelson said he is waiting to hear from one Councilmember and expected to hear from them
tomorrow. He would then be fully informed and hoped to make a decision for an appointment.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
3. BUDGET REVIEW AND OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS CHANGES TO THE
PROPOSED BUDGET Previous ly Study Item 4.1
Acting Finance Director Dave Turley advised this is an opportunity to ask questions of the directors, other
Councilmembers, or to propose amendments if the Council wished.
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked a point of order regarding the process and whether the intent was for
Councilmembers to inform of amendments or to vote on amendments tonight. Mayor Nelson said the
intent was to introduce amendments, but it was up to the Council whether to take action.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Turley for meeting with Councilmember Olson and her. One of
questions she has heard repeatedly from citizens who contact her is Non -Departmental and one of the
biggest expenses, the Fire District contract which over the past ten years has included a percentage
increase. She recalled last year 15% was included which represented the 2017-2020 contract. She asked
why no percentage was included to reflect the anticipated contract increase in 2021. Mr. Turley said that
is a complicated answer. In governmental accounting, you are really only supposed to add things to the
budget that you plan to spend or reasonably think you are going to spend. The Fire District has not had a
labor contract since 2017 so going on 4 years.
Mr. Turley relayed he has talked with representatives from the Fire District and there is no indication they
are any closer to finishing their contract. Until they get to that point, it doesn't help to put more money in
budget when the amount is unknown. Last year $1.1 million was added to the budget which resulted in
being $1.1 million over budget in 2020. Government accounting is different than private sector
accounting; governmental accounting records an expense when it is paid, not before. To speculate and
guess doesn't do the City any good. The City may want to reserve some money to ensure people are
aware there will be a retro payment requested. However, the General Fund does not have cash flow
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 17
problems, and there are ample reserves to pay the retro bill. The best practice is to do a budget
amendment at that time when the amount is known, it will be high profile and very transparent. To
speculate and guess and include an amount in the budget for 2021 is fruitless.
Councilmember Paine referred to Prisoner Care, relaying her understanding there will be a change in how
jail services are provided that likely will impact the budget. Mayor Nelson said he has heard what the
Snohomish County Sheriff is proposing and thinks it is ridiculous to request that amount in the middle of
a pandemic. Acting Chief Lawless said Snohomish County has informed all the jurisdictions that utilize
the jail of their intent to change the fee structure. Nothing has been formalized, it is still a proposed
contract change. The chiefs of police have been working with the Sheriff and his staff on the request. If
the change is approved, it will result in a significant increase. Mayors and city managers are also
engaging the Snohomish County Sheriff
Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding that the Snohomish County Jail was interested in
moving to a flat rate that would increase the cost per night from $126 to $180, a 40-45% increase. Acting
Chief Lawless explained the Snohomish County Jail currently has a three tiered prisoner charge; an initial
booking fee and a bed day fee for each day an inmate occupies the jail. The three tiers are, 1) general
population, 2) prisoners with medical issues, and 3) prisoners with psychological issues. The proposal is a
flat fee which would result in a significant increase in the Non -Departmental jail budget. Councilmember
Paine asked when that decision would be made. Acting Chief Lawless said he did not have that
information; a meeting is planned later this week with the involved parties to get more clarity.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she submitted a lot of questions earlier today. She referred to DP #1,
request to add professional services to the Human Resources Department in order to assist the City in
conducting work in the areas of equity, diversity and inclusion. She was very excited about this decision
package and felt it was something that was definitely needed in the City. One thing that stood out to her
was the amount requested was the minimal amount estimated to begin such work. She contacted HR
Director Neill Hoyson to inquire about the amount to implement that work more fully. Based on the
response, Councilmember L. Johnson said she wi II be making an amendment to add $25,000 for a total of
$75,000 to more fully establish an equity plan that goes beyond just training and creates a solid
foundation. She will provide the amendment in writing to Council.
Councilmember Olson referred to her earlier comments about building maintenance, specifically DP #35,
$500,000 in new budgeted money for building maintenance when there is a $9 million backlog. She
wanted to ensure DP #11, instead of being routed back to the General Fund, stays in building maintenance
so the backlog that was carried forward gets addressed by funds set aside for that purpose. She
summarized she wanted to rededicate the $210,222 (DP #11) to building maintenance so a true $500,000
is spent in 2021.
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled Mr. Turley presented a consolidated package that itemized all the
positions that would not be filled due to COVID. She asked for a disaggregated detailed list so she could
see exactly which positions had been excluded. For example, one of the issues identified in the retreat was
the extreme need for a code update but she did not see any code update in the budget. She requested a
more detailed list of those positions and the amount per position. Mr. Turley said he was happy to send
that to her.
Councilmember Distelhorst referred to DP #19, Human Services Program Manager, relaying his
understanding that made the current Human Services Program Manager permanent. Economic
Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty answered yes. Councilmember Distelhorst
referred to DP #22, relaying his understanding that was the funds for that department and no new
employees. Mr. Dougherty answered the way it was submitted there wasn't any new employees, but there
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 18
has been interest expressed by some Councilmembers in including an allocation for a social worker
position and/or services. It is budget authorization to set up a Human Services Program; if a majority of
the Council wishes, it may include a social worker position or services and disbursement of those
remaining funds for direct services to the community, most likely via agencies that provide those services.
Research into a social worker job description has begun so if the Council directs, it could done early next
year. Staff would also begin setting goals early next year for use of the funds. Once the Council approves
the 2021 goals and outcomes, they could be publicized in a RFP for agencies to provide direct services to
meet those goals. Councilmember Distelhorst expressed support for a full-time social worker to be
included. Mayor Nelson voiced his support as well.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Councilmember Paine's question regarding Prisoner Care,
observing an additional $300,000 has been budgeted. She asked if that would be sufficient or did that
need to be increased. Acting Chief Lawless said based on historical data for jail utilization and the
proposed increase, the amount in the budget is adequate to offset the increase. The problem is there are
not many options for jail facilities. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled a program where inmates were
housed in another county. Acting Chief Lawless said long term commitments post -conviction go to
Yakima County. Mayor Nelson advised other options are being explored.
Councilmember Paine relayed her intent to make motion to fund a Parks, Recreation and Open Space
(PROS) Plan update in the amount of $120,000. It will also help fund initiatives that are priorities for
Council and the Mayor in terms of open space acquisition and ensuring access to environmental grants
but it requires the plan be updated.
Councilmember Olson said she asked Mr. Doherty about the funding for Human Services; her
understanding was the $500,000 cost was based on the average per capita amount for certain cities.
Unrelated to whether or not she supported the program, she questioned funding a startup program at a
level on par with up -and -running programs. She was concerned with including so much money in the
budget when there were so many other demands for the money in this year's tight budget and the needs
are unknown. She wanted to ensure infrastructure was not being created without first assessing the need
and the best way to address the need. She hoped the Council would not be asked to vote on a $500,000
budget item without knowing what was behind that number. A full-time employee designated for
Edmonds via a non-profit may be a more cost efficient way of getting that service.
Councilmember Olson referred to DP #19, a half-time employee working in that same department,
pointing out there are funds designated for Human Services plus a decision package for another half-time
employee. She suggested that $50,000 should be incorporated into $500,000 for the Human Services
Department instead of a separate decision package. Mr. Doherty explained cities near Edmonds' size,
from 30,000 up to 90,000 were polled and in that pool of cities, the average was $11.91/capita which
equates to $500,000 for Edmonds. The proposal is to meet but not exceed the average. There are some
cities with a much higher per capita rate and a few that are lower. It is not the Cadillac version of a
program but the mid -level. This is budget authority, it does not have to be spent if the needs do not exist.
Staff will propose draft goals and objectives, hold a public hearing and Council will review and approve
the goals and outcomes. RFPs will then be sought from agencies that serve Edmonds based on the goals
and outcomes. Goals are usually related to different populations such as homelessness, domestic violence,
food insecurity, etc. Once responses are received, the City engages the agencies and appropriates the
funds. No particular expenditures are implied; it is budgetary authority to begin the process in the new
year, a process the Council will approve at a high level with the goals and policies and ultimately the
selection of the agencies.
With regard to DP #19, Mr. Doherty said that is changing the one-time position created in 2020 to a
permanent position. That is not a social worker, although the current employee, Mindy Woods, has had to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 19
take on a little of the social worker role in the absence of a social worker. Her job is a program manager
and liaison with regional entities and agencies, seeking grants, etc. If a social worker is added, that would
free up the human services program manager to do what was originally intended. Councilmember Olson
observed the human services program manager is part of the Human Services Department. Mr. Doherty
said the proposal was not that the $50,000 come out of the $500,000; it is proposed as a new allocation.
Councilmember Olson said that was funded at a level above and beyond the average of other cities. When
Councilmembers are looking for money, that was an area where a small amount could be identified.
Councilmember K. Johnson observed there had been quite a lot of discussion about social workers
tonight. The City has several social workers, recalling during the past year the Police Department shared
an embedded social worker with the Lynnwood Police Department and during tonight's Municipal Court
interviews, social workers associated with the court were mentioned, and the City also has a part-time
domestic violence coordinator. She suggested before the Council talks about adding social worker
positions, all the existing social workers need to be counted. This is a new concept and although it seems
to work well, there has been difficulty administering the program and the needs of the program need to be
identified before the position is funded.
Mayor Nelson advised the embedded social worker position is vacant, the person left to work for
Snohomish County. Councilmember K. Johnson said that was exactly the information the Council needed
to be aware of, whether the embedded social worker for the Police Department needed to be replaced.
Acting Chief Lawless explained the domestic violence coordinator is a specialized position and is totally
separate from a social worker. That position has been in place for going on 15 years and is specific to
domestic violence situations and the needs and services required for those individuals and assisting theirs
through the system from the incident through the court process. That position is totally separate and
different than a social worker.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said Lynnwood Police Department has decided not to fund an
embedded social worker. Acting Chief Lawless and she discussed hiring a full-time social worker for the
City who would also assist the Police Department. The need for a social worker is related to demands for
racial equity and although some may not agree or understand what social equity has to do with race,
having a social worker who can determine what is and is not racial equity is important. Many other cities
including Shoreline have actual departments that deal with equity and racial justice. She encouraged the
Council not to close their minds to hiring a social worker. She spent her career in this type of work;
having a social worker who can consider equity related to the citizens' needs is very important.
Council President Fraley-Monillas recognized many Councilmember did not understand or live racial
equity, but living in an area of Edmonds that is racially diverse, it is important to understand that area is
not the bowl or the view corridor, but people who work every day and whose significant others work
every day just to make their mortgage payments.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Non -Departmental and the $25,000 reduction in the contribution to
the Senior Center and Edmonds Center for the Arts and completely eliminating the $10,000 contribution
to the Chamber. She questioned taking that drastic step during a pandemic. Mayor Nelson said the
contribution to the Chamber in 2020 was a one-time thing. Cuts have been made everywhere and
similarly the contributions to those organizations have been cut. His proposed budget supports those
organizations but at a reduced amount to reflect the current times. Councilmember Buckshnis commented
this is intended to be a Q&A regarding the budget.
Councilmember Paine relayed her intent to make a request from the General Fund to fund the first year of
code writer in the Planning Department in the amount of approximately $140,000. She envisioned it as a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 20
3-year long-term position to assist with writing code and if the code update can be done in less than three
years, that would be terrific. The code update has been a priority for a decade and it is time to get it done.
Councilmember L. Johnson referred to the human services position, commenting that providing human
services is one area that Edmonds is playing catchup on which makes it that much more important. The
need has always been there but has been compounded by COVID and the fallout will only increase. The
sooner it is fully funded and operational the better; it could mean the difference between surviving and
falling through the cracks. With regard to DP #19 and #22, she was not interesting in reducing the
funding and if anything, it should be increased.
Councilmember Olson recalled at the budget retreat, it was suggested additions to the budget be offset by
cuts somewhere else, especially since reserves are already being used to fund the budget as proposed. She
has identified areas the Council should consider handling as budget amendments. Public Works Director
Phil Williams and Acting Chief Lawless have weighed in and did not like the idea, but there are Ford
Explorers in the fleet slated for replacement at a cost she estimated at $50,000 each. She recognized the
mileage was on the high side but the City maintains its vehicles well and she preferred their replacement
occur via a budget amendment if they could not last another year. Therefore she suggested reducing DP
445 by $100,000.
Mayor Nelson corrected Councilmember Olson's statement that the budget is dipping into reserves; he
assured the reserves are not being touched, there is an ending fund balance. Councilmember Olson asked
if the $2.7 million was from 2020 and not reserves. Mr. Turley answered General Fund revenues are
$42.4 million and budgeted expenditures are $44.3 million, so expenditures are dipping into the fund
balance by an approximately $2 million. Mayor Nelson summarized it is fund balance, not reserves. Mr.
Turley agreed, commenting people confuse fund balance and reserves.
It was the consensus of the Council to continue discussion at the next Council meeting
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson referred to the elephant in room, the increasing COVID cases. Like most people, he
learned of the restrictions over weekend. He was very disappointed in the increase in cases but Edmonds
is 100% supportive of working with and not around the governor's new restrictions. An emergency
meeting was held with restaurants in the City to identify solutions to help them and other businesses in
the community that will be impacted by the restrictions. He anticipated make further announcements later
this week. The best way to help businesses and the community is to not get COVID and that has to be the
number one priority.
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Paine urged the public to stay safe, don't go out if you don't need to, social distance and
wear a mask wherever you go.
Councilmember Buckshnis wished a Happy 50"' Anniversary to Rich Lindsay who has been with the City
for 50 years and thanked him for his service. She wished Jesse Curran, who also works for the City, a
Happy 50"' Birthday. She expressed appreciation for the City's employees and the work Mr. Lindsay has
done and will continue to do for the City.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported Shoreline is joining the Lake Ballinger Forum which will reduce
costs. She agreed with Mayor Nelson's comments about not getting COVID, wearing masks and being
safe.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 21
Councilmember L. Johnson recalled she has encouraged and almost pleaded with the public week after
week to stay home as much as possible, wear masks properly and to social distance. Her comments
tonight are lighter and happy; her daughter Emma Grace is turning 18 tomorrow. She and her daughter's
siblings plan to spend the day doting on her and making the day as special as possible while staying home
and away from other friends and family. This is yet another milestones that is being celebrated differently.
If people follow the health guidelines, maybe we can get back to normal sooner, start to celebrate
milestones with friends and family, and maybe her daughter will get to have a real high school
graduation.
Councilmember K. Johnson wished a Happy Birthday to all those having birthdays. She said when you
wear a mask, you are saving a life, not just following the rules but saving someone's life. She urged
everyone to be as well as possible.
Councilmember Olson commented when she got the news regarding the new restrictions, her heart went
out to the businesses. Thanksgiving launches the upswing in holiday shopping and it must be enormously
deflating and disappointing for businesses. While being safe, she encouraged the public to remember local
businesses, to shop at retail businesses between the streateries, and to consider buying and giving
Edmonds Cash, a program developed by the Chamber where instead of giving an Amazon gift card, a gift
recipient spends the money in Edmonds.
Councilmember Olson expressed her gratitude and thankfulness to citizens for their input. She would like
to hear from citizens on other topics as well such as streateries.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she met with big pharma on a national level today to discuss
COVID and moving forward with production of a vaccine. The vaccine appears to be moving forward
and has about a 92% approval rating. The vaccine has to go through a number of national agencies but big
pharma is confident they have some level of a pandemic response. She encouraged the public to wear
mask and to social distance. She supported everything Governor Inslee has done, assuring the restrictions
he has imposed are to save lives not to annoy or hurt people or businesses.
Councilmember Distelhorst encouraged people to stay home if they can to keep essential workers safe
who do not have the option to stay home. Don't see friends, wear a mask, not just for you but for
everyone else. He wished his spouse a Happy Birthday this week.
Student Representative Roberts wished those having birthdays a Happy Birthday and encouraged them to
celebrate safely. The Youth Commission has an opening for Position 10; he encouraged any high school
students who wanted to advocate for youth in the community to apply. Applications are available on the
Youth Commission's website. He echoed the concerns about COVID and encouraged the wearing of
masks and social distancing. This is an extraordinarily critical point in the third wave and it is up to us to
stop this virus from spreading. The sooner we can get this under control, the sooner we can resume our
normal lives and businesses can uet bank to reoidnr hiicinp..ccec He thanked the healthcare workers- on the
frontline who are constantly saving lives and putting their lives at risk. He encouraged everyone to take
care and look out for each other.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 22
COUricilinernber L. Johnson recalled she has encouraged and almost pleaded with the public week after
week to stay home as much as possible, wear masks properly and to social distance. Her comments
tonight are lighter and happy; her daughter F.nnina. Grace is turning 18 tomorrow. She and her daughter's
siblings plan to spend the clay doting on her and making the day as special as possible while staying home
and away from other friends and family. This is yet another milestones that is being celebrated differently.
If people follow the health guidelines, maybe we can bet back to normal sooner, start to celebrate
milestones with friends and family, and maybe her daughter will get to have a real high school
graduation.
Councilmember K. Johnson wished a :Happy Birthday to all those having Birthdays. She said when you
wear a rnask, you are saving a life, not just following the rules but saving sorneone's life. She urged
everyone to be as well as possible.
Councilmember Olson commented when she got the news regarding the new restrictions, her heard went
out to the businesses. Thanksgiving launches the upswing in holiday shopping and it must: be enormously
deflating and disappointing for businesses. While being safe, she encouraged the public to remember local
businesses, to shop at retail businesses between the streateries, and to consider buying and giving
Edmonds Cash, a program developed by the Chamber where instead of giving an Amazon gift card, a gift
recipient spends the money in Edmonds.
Councilmember Olson expressed ]let- gratitude and thankfulness to citizens for their input. She would like
to hear from citizens on other topics as well such as streateries.
Council l3resident Fraley -Manillas said she met with big pharma on a national level today to discuss
COV1D and moving forward with production of a vaccine. The vaccine appears to be moving forward
and has about a 92% approval rating. 'file vaccine has to go through a number of national agencies but big
pliarnna is confident they have some level of a pandemic response. She encouraged the public to wear
mask and to social distance. She supported everything Governor Inslee has clone, assuring the restrictions
he has imposed are to save fives not to annoy or hurt people or businesses.
Councilmember Distelhorst encouraged people to stay home if they can to keep essential workers safe
who do not have tine option to stay home. Don't see .friends, wear a mask, not just for you but for
everyone else. He wished his spouse a Happy Birthday this week..
Student Representative Roberts wished those having birthdays a klappy Birthday and encouraged them to
celebrate safely. The Youth Commission has an opening for Position 10; he encouraged any high school
students who wanted to advocate for youth in the community to apply. Applications are available on the
Youth Commission's wfebsite. He echoed the concerns about COV1D and encouraged the wearing of
masks and social distancing. This is an extraordinarily critical point in the third wave and it is up to us to
stop this virus from spreading. The sooner we can get this under control, the sooner we can resume our
normal fives and businesses can get back to regular businesses. He thanked the healthcare workers on the
frontline who are constantly saving lives and putting; their lives at risk, fle encouraged everyone to take
care and look out for each other.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m.
MI AEL NELSON, MAYOR
S PASSEY, CITY CLERK
l dmon is City Council Approved Minurls
November 17, 2020
Page 22
Public Comment for 11/17/20 Council Meeting:
From: Elaine began
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:17 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public hearing on 184th St. SW street vacation and official street map change
Dear Council Members
I would like to deny both the street vacation and official street map change. The Perrinville
woods are an essential part of the community, neighborhood as well as the wildlife habitat. I do
not want to see it change.
Thankyou
Elaine Began
From: Jake Hitchner
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 7:49 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 11/17 City Council Question
Hi, my name is Jake Hitchner. I own one of the homes (#11 on the map) that borders this
potential development. I'm concerned about how this might impact my property as well as my
neighbors. My detached garage sits above the bank where the vacation is planned. Should this
development be approved, what are the specific plans for a retaining wall? Who pays for this?
From: Teresa Holt
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 4:47 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Meeting ID 425 775 2525
I would like to add my comments to many others about the proposed development of the
Perrinville Woods. Please do not 'amend the street map and street vacation'. Why would the
City give away our rights or lands for free? If that is the case, I would like to get on the list for
free land too please.
The City of Edmonds Strategic Action Plan calls for the city government, among other actions,
to:
1) Take advantage of special/unique characteristics of area
2) Build on the community's history, heritage, natural resources and livability ..
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 23
3) Maintain and enhance Edmonds' community character and quality of life
1) 1 believe that this development would go against the Strategic Action Plan in all three ways
noted above. 1) The Perrinville Woods are a special and unique place, habitat for owls and
salmon. The City completed a project this fall near Sierra Park to mitigate storm water runoff
into Perrinville Creek that required grant writing and collaboration with other agencies. Why
would the City now negate those efforts and costs by allowing this development?
2) The mature trees in this area are part of our history as an early shingle mill town. They are
part of the heritage we'd like to leave to our children. They are part of the natural
resources that we are trying to preserve by actions such as the City plastic bag ban. They are
part of our contribution to control climate change and they increase the livability of our city by
offering an area for recreation. These mature trees would be difficult to 'relocate' somewhere
else in Edmonds or offset in another way.
3) The Perrinville Woods personify Edmonds community character and quality of life. The
woods are a wonderful place to walk as a family or with friends, enhancing our community
connections. The woods contribute to a high quality of life when we can walk under a tall tree
canopy accessed without getting in our cars.
I believe this project should be put on hold until there is a low -impact development standard
and a new tree code for Perrinville and the watershed. You can see the effects of the lack of a
comprehensive plan by the hodge podge setbacks, varying easements and development. What
you might not see easily is the effect on the Creek or other natural areas just beyond view. On
this particularly rainy night, you can imagine the water runoff from a new development that
could be made worse by giving away land to increase the size of that development.
Please do not 'amend the street map and street vacation'. I believe this project should be put
on hold until there is a low -impact development standard and a new tree code for Perrinville
and the watershed.
Thank you for your consideration of all those who will be affected by this project.
Teresa Jolly Holt
Edmonds; WA
From: David Holt
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 4:26 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Perrinville Woods Project - Mtg ID 425-775-2525
Hello Edmonds City Council
I'm writing to object to the City (and citizens of Edmonds) giving the Perrinville Woods
developer any land for free. If the City is now in the business of giving away land, I'd like to
know where I can sign up.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 24
Please do not approve the project until a deal is struck to sell the right of way for the road
based on fair market value.
Our family has lived in the Seaview Neighborhood (just around the corner from the proposed
development) for over 25 years.
Thanks for your service to our community.
Many thanks,
David Holt
From: Ashley Sytsma
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 2:59 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: No on Perrinville Development
Hello, I'm an Edmonds resident who'd like you to please do all you can this evening to stop the
14 house development of precious land in Perrinville. I love Edmonds because of its
commitment to preserving nature. I hope you will continue this legacy!! -Ashley Sytsma,
Edmonds, WA
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 2:00 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 2021 Budget, public hearing
Council and Mayor Nelson,
I have two major concerns about the 2021 budget.
First, no money has been budgeted for the long overdue code rewrite.
As Ken Reidy has told you, former Development Services Director Duane Bowman stated during
the October 25, 2005 City Council meeting that he had been describing the need to update the
Zoning CODE since he was hired in 2000. 1 strongly urge you to budget for a code rewrite in
2021. Our messed up code is extremely costly to citizens, and to the environment.
Mayor Nelson, as well as budgeting for the code rewrite, please require your staff to report to
you and the citizens how previous allocated funds were spent.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 25
Second, regarding "Decision package #22 added $500,000 for the human services program," I
have the following questions:
(1) How will the "added $500,000" be spent? Please provide the page number on which these
expenses are delineated.
(2) What are the specific needs (in addition to homelessness and housing insecurity) that you
are hoping to address with the human services program?
(3) What metrics have you used to identify the community's need for additional human services
under city auspices?
(4) How did you conclude that those needs could be met by creating a new department
overseen by Edmonds City government?
These questions must be answered before the allocation of any more funds to human services.
As a LICSW in the state of Washington and having practiced in Pennsylvania, California and
Washington, I am well aware that social services are historically underfunded. I am also aware
that teamwork within each existing agency is critical for success in the provision of social
services.
I am not convinced that a COE human services department will be able to meet the enormous
need for social services in our community. I fear the most likely scenario is that a lone social
worker (or two) will be ill-equipped to meet the needs of the community, and will have to refer
to agencies better able to address needs.
Please don't add new city services to the taxpayer burden without careful deliberation of what
problems you hope to solve, and how you plan to solve them.
Regards,
Joan Bloom
From: ewald yao
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:03 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Pilar Yao <pyao24@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
Hi Susan and Laura,
Thanks for your quick response!
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 26
My understanding is that the city owns one of the parcels around 0.6 acre. Is my understanding
correct? Without this parcel, the developer can't develop this total 5 parcel land with 10%
reservation requirements.
If not, both of your responses seem to imply the fact that the City can't do too much about it to
block this development, which is quite different from what I've read the other comments
around the same issue from other Edmonds residents.
Ewald & Pilar
From: ewald yao
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 12:11 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
Dear All Edmonds Council Members,
In regards to the above agenda in the subject line this evening, 11/17/202, and as two Edmonds
residents, we want Council to DENY both the street vacation and the official street map
change.
My reasoning is simple - It needs heavy lifting to make all these 5 parcels suitable for building
14 homes. As based on its nature and what it is now, it's a environmentally critical area. As a
result, it must sacrifice what's meant to be preserved for generations to come. Not to mention,
over 200 conifer trees, two steep ravines, two ponds, and Perrinville Creek, etc., will be hugely
impacted with extensive excavation!
We support the idea to make it into "The Perrinville Woods Preserve".
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AS IT'S MEANT TO BE FOR THIS ONE
Ewald Yao
Pilar Yao
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 11:27 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff
<jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>
Subject: Item for 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street...
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 27
Council members,
I am writing to urge you to deny both the 184th Street Vacation and the Official Street Map
change. Many citizens are in agreement that approval is not in the public interest.
In a LTE to myedmondsnews Marjie Fields said:
"The recent four -month moratorium on permits for wooded lot development may allow a new
tree code to mitigate some damage to the property, but denying the street map amendment
and street vacation land give-away will be an important start."
https://myedmondsnews.com/2020/11/reader-view-speak-out-about- ivin -u -cit - ro ert -
ri hts
Bill Phipps stated in his LTE to myedmondsnews:
"There is a reason that land has not been developed. It would require extensive excavation to
achieve 14 buildable sites. The sediment runoff and the storm water runoff, from the loss of
hundreds of large trees, would be environmentally detrimental to the watershed below."
httos://mvedmondsnews.com/202O/ll/letter-to-the-editor-council-should-vote-no-on-
pc-rrinviile-woods-street-vacation-ma -amendment
And from Daune Farmen's LTE:
"The applicant has sufficient amount of land for the proposed 14-lot subdivision without
gaining access to more land, so, in his words, "[he] can have more development flexibility and
increase average lot size to 13,383sf".
Any increase in lot size has the potential for the unnecessary removal of significant trees and
excess grading of steep slopes and ravines."
https.ljmyedmondsnews.com/202O/ll/letter-to-the-editor-seaview-woods-proposals-not-in-
oublic-interest/
I echo these serious concerns expressed by the writers. There is an additional concern that
what Council is being asked to do is not allowed by our City code.
Again, I urge you to deny this street vacation and street map change. I hope that it is as clear to
all of you as it is to many citizens that it would not be in the public interest.
Regards,
Joan Bloom
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 28
From: Paul Richard
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:13 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
Regarding public hearing 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street
Map Change: I want Council to DENY both the street vacation and the official street map
change. As a resident on 81st Ave W, I am very concerned at the loss of forest and the impact
to the surrounding area. The wooded area is a watershed and helps protect the Perrinville
creek. I'd like to see Edmonds City Counsel turn the remaining wooded area into a park
preserve and encourage Edmonds residents to help clean and maintain the area. The Edmonds
Parks department should incorporate trails for public use similar to the Woodway Reserve in
the town of Woodway just south of Edmonds. There is already a plan to cut and develop the
recent property sale of 18339 184th St SW. Besides generating tax revenue, why allow more
development and lose the opportunity to develop more parks and recreation for Edmonds
residents?
Paul Richard
From: Sue Robertson
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 11:30 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Perrinville
7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30 min)
The street vacation and the official street map change.
Considering climate change, I do not think this is the time to be cutting down trees. Please vote
DENY.
Sue Robertson
From: Alyssa Fairbanks
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:35 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30
min)
Dear Councilors,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 29
I urge you to vote "DENY" on both the 184th St Southwest Street vacation and official street
map change in the Perrinville neighborhood. (7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street
Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30 min))
While housing is important, climate change is a reality and we are at a critical time in our ability
to address climate change. The Perrinville neighborhood is currently a wonderful area full of
trees and greenspaces. The Perrinville woods are an environmentally critical area and an asset
to the neighborhood and city of Edmonds.
Please be visionary leaders in Edmonds and save this important area. We do not need more
luxury homes that are unaffordable and out of reach for young families. We do need parks, and
green spaces, and to act decisively to help protect our planet!
Also, please pay attention to the voices from your community. We elect you to serve us and our
community. While only currently 20 comments on one article, there is clearly a passionate
opposition to this unnecessary development
project. https://mvedmondsnews.com/2020/`11/letter-to-the-editor-council-should-vote-no-
on-perrinville-woods-street-vacation-map-amendment/
Sincerely,
Alyssa Fairbanks
From: Mona Fairbanks
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:10 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Fw: Perrinville
Please vote 'DENY' both
7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30 min)
The street vacation and the official street map change.
III this critical time of climate change VVe NEED tl ees I lot concrete!
Please think of our children first!
Mona Fairbanks
From: Julie & Rich Kuehn
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 10:01 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 30
Cc: Burley, Shannon <Shannon.Burley@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Hearing on 184th ST - Perrinville Woods
To the Edmonds City Council,
We are writing as long time residents of Edmonds and specifically 15 year residents on 184th
Street in the Seaview/Perrinville area. We have attended council meetings previously to ask for
the City of Edmonds to purchase the Perrinville Woods land to create a Perrinville Preserve
(similar to the Woodway Preserve) and feel that the city really missed an opportunity to protect
an environmentally vulnerable area back in 2014. We ask that you DENY the street vacation
and the official street map change. The amount of excavation that would be required to build
on this land and the sediment runoff and the storm water runoff, from the loss of hundreds of
large trees, would be environmentally detrimental to the watershed below.
Please see below from the SnoKing Watershed Council for background on this
land. http://snokingwatershedcouncii.org/protect-edmonds-perrinville-creek
This property is entirely forested with very steep slopes, several critical areas, a
wetland and is a major drainage of the Perrinville Creek basin. Perrinville Creek
supports a Cutthroat trout population throughout and Coho salmon on the lower
end of the stream.
The Geotechnical study indicated several steep slopes on site. The steepest range from 83% to
134%. There are two major ravines and also a small wetland in the center of the property.
The tree study completed in 2005 indicates a good stand of Douglas fir with several identified
with a diameter of 48 to 50". The forest is a mix of large Douglas fir, some Hemlock and smaller
alder. There are a few cedar and cottonwood trees along 80th Ave W.
The wetland is roughly in the center of the tract. It provides a ponding area for
stormwater drainage from the homes off 185 St and 185th PI W. and the slopes of
the ravine leading from the south down into the ponding area. The city's peer study
indicated the wetland did not qualify to be filled because it does support the local
wildlife population. The Hearing Examiner however, in his decision, did allow for
the wetland to be filled.
Grading to accommodate buildable sites will be extensive. Grading plans indicate 20-25' cuts,
especially along the ridge above Perrinville and some areas requiring up to 50' of fill material.
One report suggests 35' cuts will be needed to keep the roadways grades to 12% or less.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 31
Estimates on the amount of soil to be removed from the site or used as fill could be as much as
35,000 cubic yards.
The property with its steep slopes, ravines and wetlands, makes this a good site for hiking trails
and wildlife viewing. In addition there are two fairly level areas, one off 80th Ave W and the
other off Olympic View drive that would accommodate picnicking areas. There is in addition
ample room for a small parking area off Olympic View Drive where Mr. Park's home now
stands.
This site is a watershed of Perrinville Creek which the city has acknowledged is a stream in
trouble due to excessive and polluted runoff. According to a news article dated August 13,
2013, the city will receive a $188,772 grant from the Washington Department of Ecology's
Watershed Protection and Restoration Program. According to the article the project's primary
goal is to reduce flows in Perrinville Creek, a tributary to Puget Sound, by reducing stormwater
runoff. The article states; "The flow reduction will provide multiple hydrologic and biological
benefits to both the Creek and Brown's Bay in the Sound such as: allowing for the replacement
of an anadromous fish barrier culvert, reducing erosion and sedimentation that is impacting
aquatic habitat and City infrastructure, and reducing the amount of pollutants in the aquatic
environment,"
Thank you for looking into the history of this topic and looking toward our long term future.
Adding 14 houses will not fix our housing crisis and if this site is developed we will double down
on the already delicate area.
Rich and Julie Kuehn
From: Diana van Loveren
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 5:52 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Suhiert: Seaview/Perrinville Woods - Publir Hearing nn 1R4th St cW Street Vacation iz Official
Street Map Change
To: Edmonds City Council
We are asking you to not approve the right-of-way street vacation request and the request for
the 184th St W street map amendment on the above referenced area at the November 17,
2020 Edmonds City Council meeting.
This is definitely not in our interest. The stormwater runoff from this subdivision will drain
directly into Perrinville Creek that runs through our backyard. Giving the applicant additional
land for larger lots and larger homes will cause more damage to an already stressed Perrinville
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 32
Creek that is currently experiencing severe erosion and flooding of its banks. We believe more
information should be obtained and more studies done on Perrinville Creek's watershed before
any further changes are made.
Thank you,
Diana & Rene VanLoveren
From: devin turner
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 7:30 PM
To: Diana van Loveren
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Re: Seaview/Perrinville Woods - Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation & Official Street
Map Change
Hi City Council,
We are Diana and Rene's next door neighbors and are 100% im agreement with the statements below.
This lot expansion could have grave impacts on an already fragile ecosystem.
Sincerely,
Devin and Heather Turner
From: steve hatzenbeler
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 4:16 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 184th St SW street vacation
I'm writing to voice my concern about the proposed right of way vacation and street map
change for the "Perrinville Woods" property east of 80th Ave W at the intersection with 184th
St SW. In my opinion the proposed changes do not offer any value to the City or its citizens, but
offer considerable value to the developer. It is not in the public interest to provide these
increases in value to the developer.
According to the City's GIS maps, the subject parcels are covered with numerous critical areas
including wetlands and Landslide and Erosion Hazard areas with steep slopes ranging from over
15% to over 40%. These areas are held together and stabilized now by dense vegetation. The
existing 60-ft mapped street will provide better protection of the critical areas than the CAO
will, as I believe it will reduce the developable area on the site and result in fewer new parcels,
fewer new homes, less impervious surfacing, and generally lower impact on the critical areas
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 33
and Perrinville Creek downstream. Perrinville Creek already has well known capacity concerns.
Modifying the street map would encourage the maximum possible density on the subject
parcels, and this would assure the maximum possible impact on Perrinville Creek, which does
not seem to be in the public interest.
Regarding the potential street vacation, if the subdivision does move forward, maintaining the
public right of way out to Olympic View Drive seems to be a valuable community asset. It could
open a path for a walkway and stairs to be built to connect the 184th St SW residential
neighborhood more directly to the Perrinville commercial district and encourage more foot
traffic and less driving. It appears the City is advocating for this pedestrian connection to be
made with future establishment of an easement, but a right of way that is already established
seems better, and doesn't require any change to existing conditions. At an absolute minimum,
if the street vacation is approved, it should only be approved with the granting of an easement
in exchange for the vacation, per ECDC 20.70.140.A.3.b.
Thank you for your consideration.
Steve Hatzenbeler, Edmonds
From: Ann Jacky
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 3:35 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Perrinville Wood
7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30 min)
I am absolutely against the street vacation and the street map change. We should not be
completely bulldozing the trees. Several years aga a slum landlord that owned 40 rundown
properties In Edmonds passed away. Two of the properties were on my street. The contractor
came out and marked trees (whether it was for removal or not we could not tell). When it came
time to clear the lots they bulldozed every last tree. My house is an infill house built in 2001. 1 t
was not built as a spec house. They people who had it built lived in it. They left a large cedar, a
large flowering plum an -a' several large rhododendrons that date uack to the early L700 s. vve
have planted more trees. Evey time I see new construction around here, they take all of the
trees.
I'm not opposed to infill (I live in one) and my new neighbors are lovely people. But we need to
stop building the way we are now.
Annamarie Jacky
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 34
From: VR
Date: Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 3:11 PM
Subject: Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
To: <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Please, I beg of you, do NOT vote to approve the 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street
Map Change.
There exists no pressing need for already wealthy developers to increase their wealth at the
expense of this pristine natural resource. (And I say natural resource because vegetation
absorbs carbon dioxide and produces oxygen - exactly the kind of thing we need more of, not
less of these days.) And there is also no pressing need to provide 14 high end domiciles for the
wealthy to enjoy at the expense of an irreplaceable woodland full of natural beauty that is also
home to wild creatures who frankly deserve to live on this planet every bit as much as we do.
Please be good and mindful stewards of this woodland on behalf of the current and future
generations of Edmonds residents. Please protect the beauty and essential function of this
area. Once destroyed it is gone forever.
Virginia Rostad
From: cdfarmen
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:39 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 184th Street vacation
Dear Council Members,
The loss of any significant tree to accommodate the development of this proposed subdivision
is unacceptable and is not within the public's interest.
One such situation involves two small groves of significant trees that are in jeopardy of being
cut down should the street removal request be approved. One grove is located at the point
where the 184th right -of way crosses lots 1 and part of lot 2.The other grove is where the right-
of-way cuts across the upper portion of lots 4 and 5.
Hopefully you will conclude, as I do, that no public interest exists in either the partial vacation
or street removal request. There just is no value to the general public in allowing the applicant
to gain access to more area to expand the size of the subdivision. The developer already has
sufficient space for his proposed 14 unit subdivision.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 35
Please keep in mind this property drains directly into Perrinville creek and on into Puget
Sound's Brown's bay. The city is using thousands of dollars of public funds for the retro-fit
projects to protect the creek. Any decision with regard to this property needs to be made with
that in mind.
Respectfully submitted,
Duane Farmen
Seaview resident
From: Dawna Lahti
Received: Monday November 16, 2020
To: Members of the Edmonds City Council & Public Comment
Beloved voices for us citizens of Edmonds:
The Perrinville Woods is a priceless 5-acre stand of timber now on the block to be reduced to
worthless sawdust. We have the eyes of the 21st century ecologists. We cluck over the
senseless destruction of distant rainforest, smug with the confidence that we would prevent
that if we lived there. But our actual actions square better with the short-sightedness of the last
century's speculators —those who reckoned "land -improvement" as draining swamps and
dotting the resultant loss of habitat with "little boxes made of tick-y tack-y." We can do better
than this, friends. We are better than this.
Please cast your precious vote on our behalf to save what may be saved. I beg you to deny both
street vacation and street map rewrites. In so doing you preserve even a few trees —trees
which took twice your lifetime to grow. A tree code, if enacted, will replace them with a
sapling —this vote can save the mature, slope -holding, carbon sequestering tree. Thank you.
Respectfully,
Dawna Lahti
From: Sally Barringer
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:15 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: STREET VACATION HEARING 184TH STREET RIGHT OF WAY
Hello Council Members:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 36
There is no "public interest" in the council approving ether the partial vacation of 184th Street
right-of-way or the removal of 184th Street right-of-way from the city's official street map.
The developer purchased this parcel knowing the previous approved plan was for a 14-lot
subdivision.
There is enough area to develop his 14 lot subdivision without vacating part of or the entire
184th Street right-of-way.
There is not benefit to the public to granting this request. But, it will enable the developer to
come back with a request to develop more lots that will lead to more grading of the steep
slopes and ravines that has already caused damage to my property that has a steep bank to my
property above the proposed 184t" street right-of-way.
Please deny this application.
Sally Barringer
Edmonds, WA 98026
From: Richard Senderoff
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 1:33 PM
To: Johnson, Kristiana<kristiana.johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Distelhorst, Luke
<Luke.Distelhorst@edmondswa.gov>; Monillas, Adrienne
<Adrienne.Monillas@edmondswa.gov>; Buckshnis, Diane
<Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov>; Olson, Vivian <Vivian.Olson @edmondswa.gov>; Paine,
Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>; Johnson, Laura <Laura.Johnson@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: About Perrinville Street Vacation & Map Change
Dear Councilmembers,
I am a Seaview neighborhood resident opposed to the Perrinville Street vacation; it is NOT in
the Public Interest.
No doubt you have received many other letters/comments, regarding the environmental
impacts of developing Perri nviIIeWoods (including my previous recent comments). The
Perrinville Woods/Perrinville Watershed is arguably the 2nd most environmentally -sensitive
area in the City of Edmonds (behind the Edmonds Marsh Wildlife Sanctuary); I agree with the
sentiments provided by others. The City seems to have missed its opportunity (possibly, in
partnership with Snohomish County) to explore protection of this natural area adjacent to
Snohomish County's South County Park (separated only by a street) from development; a big
mistake, especially for a city that tries promoting itself as environmentally friendly.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 37
The proposed 14-subdivision itself is not consistent with the Council's effort to increase
affordable housing. The current plans are NOT for affordable homes, but more
McMansions. So why encourage this development approach?
And most importantly, the City (or any city) should not be in the practice of giving away
undeveloped land (without compensation), allowing a developer to have more area for a
subdivision development so that lot sizes can be increased (allowing not necessarily more
lots/homes, but bigger lots). Of course, the consequence of street vacation will result in more
land grading, more damage to wildlife corridors, more wetland degradation, more tree loss,
and more stormwater issues which negatively impact Perrinville Creek (a salmon creek) as well
as properties adjacent to the creek. Please remember that what is often referred to as "City
Property' is actually "Edmonds' Citizens/Taxpayers Property" and as such should NOT be simply
given away for free. At the very least, due compensation should be provided; and the
compensation should be based on the land value subsequent to the proposed development (not
that of the undeveloped land).
For all these reasons, the Perrinville Street Vacation is NOT in the Public Interest.
Sincerely,
Rich
P.S. "Suddenly, it becomes a subversion of progress to assert the common -Sense principle that
communities exist for the health and enjoyment of those who live in them, not for the
convenience of those who drive through them, fly over them, or exploit their real estate for
profit." —Theodore Roszak
From: Rita Baeyen <rita.baeyen@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 12:51 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Council@efmondswa.gov
Subject: 7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Map Change Request
City Council of Edmonds, Wa :
As a resident of Edmonds I urge the City Council to vote NO on the proposed street vacation and the
official street map change to the Perrinville Woods. It is vital that as much of this area as possible be
preserved as critical habitat. Our opportunities are disturbingly few for saving what little natural
environment we have left. Let's not let this one slip away. There is no going back.
The decision to take the first steps to save this habitat is in the hands of the City Council. Please vote NO
on this proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 38
From: sara
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 12:09 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
Dear Council Members,
As a citizen concerned about the future of Edmonds, I am urging you to Deny both the 184th St. SW
street vacation and the official street map change. We have lived in Edmonds for 8 years, and have
witnessed tree after tree being cut down, and land cleared to make way for development of high end
houses. From where I'm sitting, it often seems that the city planners are more concerned with
developing the land than preserving critical natural areas, for example, along Shell Creek, which is a
salmon habitat.
Please help maintain Perrinville Woods and, perhaps, a restoration project of the Perrinville Creek
watershed could also be in our future.
Thank you,
Sara Lynch
From: Bredouw2
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 12:00 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: "Perrinville Woods"
I want to add my voice to those concerned about protecting Edmonds. The property owner
has certain rights - but not to the point of destroying the environment of everyone else. Giving
up control of any land is a mistake. Whatever can be done at this point to avoid habitat
destruction - and preserve as many trees as possible - should be done. Remember - gone is
forever. You have a choice and a duty to preserve as much as possible.
Thankyou
Pat Bredouw
From: Mo
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 11:52 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 39
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Save the Perrinville Woods!
I am referring to:
7. 1. Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change (30
Please vote to DENY both the street vacation and the official street map change. This is an
opportunity to save a forest, perpetuate Edmonds' standing as a tree community AND leave a
legacy for future generations.
You've allowed way too much clear cut building. We don't need 14 more homes, but we do
need more trees and to preserve what we have. Allowing this would be a horrible shame. Have
a conscience and practice what you preach about being a green and tree community, and vote
NO. Please preserve this space for us now and for our future generations. There's no going
back.
Thankyou!
Maurine Jeude
From: Laura Bowers
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 8:50 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Wooded Lot in Perrinville
I am writing to oppose the development of the wooded lot in Perrinville.
I am a downtown Edmonds resident and frequently drive past this significant intersection. With
land development on the other 3 corners, the greenfield site not only brings visual relief, but an
environmental buffer for wildlife, habitat and nearby creek. It would be a great short and long
term loss to the Edmonds community if significant trees were cut down for a private
development. The site is located in close proximity to the Perrinville Creek, which is an
environmentally critical area. Given the current political climate and this significant moment in
time, we need to be making efforts to acknowledge and slow climate change. I believe
stopping this development would be a step in the right direction.
I thank you for kindly considering these concerns, when deciding on the street map amendment
and street vacation.
Sincerely,
Laura Bowers
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 40
From: Katy Levenhagen
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:40 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Seaview Woods Hearing
Hello Edmonds City Council Members,
I would like to make a public comment about to be directed to the upcoming city council
hearing on Nov. 17 involving 2 vacation requests in the Edmonds, Seaview area:
1. A developer has asked the city to vacate part of the easterly end of 184th Street ROW
near Olympic View Drive. He wants to use that area for expansion of a proposed
subdivision and a pedestrian access easement to Olympic View Drive.
2. The developer also has asked the city to remove the entire 184th ROW from the official
street map. The applicant has stated it will allow for "more development flexibility and
increase the average lot size"
I understand that the city council must follow the criteria found in Edmonds Development code
(ECDC 20.70.020) which states the city must find the vacation of the ROW to be "in the public's
interest".
I want to register my opinion that this ROW is NOTin the public's interest. It will substantially
increase the number of cars entering 80th Ave. W, a streeet with NO sidewalk on either side
and a very large hill heading north directly coming out of what would be the new entrance into
184th. 80th Ave. W is a popular walking and biking route for residents of the area including
many children who walk to Seaview school, Seaview and Sierra parks. The increase in traffic on
a street where children must take care to walk on the shoulder of a street with limited visioin as
cars come screaming over the crest of the hill heading south would be a recipe for an accident
and surly not in the public's interest.
In addition, protecting our local environment is a matter of public interest. With access to
184th, more development flexibilty and increasing average lot sizes would impact the loss of
mature trees increase the amount of excavation of steep slopes and deep ravines, and increase
the risk of more stormwater runoff causing further damage to Perrinville Creek ... this is not in
the Public's interest.
Thank you for your consideration.
Katy Levenhagen, A concerned Perrinville resident.
8018 181st PI. SW
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 41
Edmonds, WA 98026
From: Wendy Curry
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:26 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 184th St. Right -of -Way
To whom it may concern,
We live on 180th St. SW and we want to express our belief that it's not in the public's interest
for the City of Edmonds to vacate the 184th St. Right -of -Way near Olympic View Drive.
We implore you to deny the landowners request for a partial vacation of the 184th St. Right -of -
Way and the removal of the entire undeveloped Right -of -Way of 184th St. from the City's
official street map.
Not only will it be negatively impactful to the environment, it will also mean more traffic on
180th St. that is already unsafe for residents to walk without sidewalks.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter,
Bryan and Wendy Curry
From: Bill Phipps
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 2:09 PM
To: Wippel, Teresa (My Edmonds News) <myedmondsnews@gmail.com>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: opinion piece for sub— mittal : Save the Pre rrinvllle Woods
Open Letter to Edmonds City Council and Mayor Nelson;
I am writing about the upcoming votes on the Perrinville Woods. I encourage you to vote NO
on both the street vacation and the street map amendment. It is not in the public interest to
further the development of the Perrinville Woods.
This issue here is the Perrinville Woods. There are over two hundred significant conifer trees
up there. There are two steep ravines that run through there. There are two ponds. it is right
above the already stressed Perrinville Creek. There are a couple old abandoned houses on
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 42
otherwise untouched 5 acres of land. It is the very definition of an environmentally "critical
area."
There is a reason that land has not been developed. It would require extensive excavation to
achieve 14 buildable sites. The sediment runoff and the storm water runoff, from the loss of
hundreds of large trees, would be environmentally detrimental to the watershed below. A
watershed for which we are responsible to maintain.
How is it in the public interest to destroy the last major pocket forest in Edmonds (excepting
parks) for 14 luxury homes? Those homes will not help diversify our housing options.
In fact, the Perrinville Woods should never be developed. It is the last of its kind in Edmonds, It
should be preserved forever. It should be acquired and made into a park; The Perrinville Woods
Preserve.
I hope the City of Edmonds can come together to Save the Perrinville Woods! We should apply
for low interest loans from the Forterra Land Conservancy.. We should seek matching grants
from local preservation groups. We should create a local Edmonds Land Trust so that
individuals and businesses can contribute to saving the Perrinville Woods.
We won't be remembered if we lose the Perrinville Woods for yet another housing
development. Don't let these woods be destroyed. Let's protect Perrinville Creek. Let's be
remembered as the community that came together to create a lasting legacy.
Come on City Council. Come on Mayor Nelson. Come on Parks Department. Come on citizens
of Edmonds. Let's do something great together. Let's do something we can be proud of. Let us
create the The Perrinville Woods Preserve!
Let us Save the Perrinville Woods !
Thank you;
Bill Phipps
Edmonds resident
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:22 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>;
Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>; Passey, Scott
<Scott.Passey@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Hope, Shane
<Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Williams, Phil <Phil.Wllliams@edmondswa.gov>; Lien,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 43
Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for November 17, 2020 City Council meeting
The State of Washington has plenary power over public rights -of -way and may
choose to vacate the public's easement for public travel on a right-of-way. The State has
invested Municipal Corporations with this authority by Statute - See Chapter 35.79
RCW: STREETS —VACATION.
Chapter 35.79 RCW states that the Vacation Ordinance may provide that the city retain
an easement or the right to exercise and grant easements in respect to the vacated land for the
construction, repair, and maintenance of public utilities and services. Use of the word "may" in
an ordinance indicates an action is permissive, rather than an imperative duty. Obviously,
any easements retained by the City must be for the construction, repair, and maintenance of
public utilities and services.
The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) states the following in Section 20.70.140:
A. Generally. Following the public hearing, the city council shall, by motion approved by a
majority of the entire membership in a roll call vote, either:
1. Adopt an ordinance granting the vacation; or
2. Adopt a motion denying the vacation; or
3. Adopt a resolution of intent to vacate stating that the city council will, by
ordinance, grant the vacation if the owner(s) of property abutting upon the street or alley, or
part thereof so vacated, meet specific conditions within 90 days.
Use of the word shall in an ordinance imposes an imperative, rather than permissive, duty.
Singleton v. Frost, 108 Wash. 2d 723, 728, 742 P.2d 1224 (1987).
In summary, ECDC Section 20.70.140.A clearly requires the City of Edmonds to adopt 1 of 3
things. The City of Edmonds failed to do so related to the vacation of the unopened 7 %'
wide easement in my neighborhood. The City chose to do a 411 thing - Adopt an
ordinance granting the vacation and retaining a Temporary Construction Easement against the
will of the underlying fee property owner.
Making it worse, the Temporary Construction Easement was reserved exclusively for the use of
a private developer - the 5-year term of the easement was made contemporaneous with the 5-
year life of the private developer's preliminary plat approval! The City had no
need to construct, repair or maintain anything on Reidy's fee title property - yet the City
violated law and retained the easement anyway. To my knowledge - this is the only time in
the history of the United States of America that a Municipality has reserved a Temporary
Construction Easement without a need to construct, repair or maintain anything for the
public.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 44
The City cannot lawfully act in disregard of its own ordinances — but the City of Edmonds
chose to do so anyway. It forced conditions on the Reidy family rather than adopting a
resolution of intent to vacate stating that the City Council will, by ordinance, grant the vacation
if specific conditions are met within ninety (90) days. The Reidy family never granted the
Temporary Construction Easement —there was no 90-day period and there is
no Grant Document.
Our nation is built upon the principle that citizen and state alike are under the law and bound
by it. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 163, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803) (ours is a "government
of laws, and not of men"); Thomas Paine, Common Sense and Other Political Writings 32
(Nelson F. Adkins ed., 1953) ("in America the law is king").
Sadly — the City of Edmonds has long acted as if law does not bind it — that the City can violate
its own laws and make it the burden of the harmed citizen to try and overcome the City's illegal
conduct.
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:21 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>;
Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen
<Kernen. Lien@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for the Public Hearing on 184th St SW Street Vacation and Official
Street Map Change
City Staff recommends approval of both the Street Vacation and Official Street Map Change
applications with conditions.
Regarding the Official Street Map Change, please respond in full to all issues I raised in my
Public Comment submittal — File No. PLN20190011 provided to Planning Board on April 23,
2019. It has been over 18 months since I asked questions related to this process.
Regarding the Street Vacation, Staff's recommendation is not allowed under City law.
City law expressly identifies what the City Council can do should it decide to adopt
a resolution of intent to vacate stating that the city council will, by ordinance, grant the
vacation if the owner(s) of property abutting upon the street or alley, or part thereof so
vacated, meet specific conditions within 90 days.
ECDC 20.70.140.A.3 expressly identifies what the City may require as conditions.
City of Edmonds government has really struggled with this clear, express Code over the
years.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 45
For example, the City has forced a last second surprise Temporary Construction Easement on
property owners against their will PLUS failed to get the property owners to grant the new
easement during a 90-day condition period.
The City has also required parties to grant new easements to 3rd parties (instead of granting
such to the City) PLUS pay maximum compensation. So much for the clear, express Either:OR
law. Please notice that OR is in all caps.
Last year, City Staff attempted to change the Either:OR law despite Planning Board's
recommendation that Council keep the Either:OR law. That bizarre Code update process ran
into a brick wall exactly 13 months ago and has sat in a mysterious suspended status ever
since. The October 15, 2019 City Council Meeting minutes include the following:
"Mayor Earling assumed this would be done by the end of the year or the process would need
to start over."
No matter what the mysterious status of the Street Vacation Code update is, the City's
lawlessness must stop.
There is no provision in the City Code allowing City Council to require as a condition to a street
vacation that the Applicant shall submit a Subdivision Application to the City of Edmonds.
Because the Code is clear as it expressly authorizes what the City may require as conditions to
street vacations, Staff's recommendation cannot be acted upon by City Council.
The City also needs to explain to all taxpayers exactly how existing public utilities (water, sewer
and storm) came to meander in and around a "planned" right-of-way line and on private
property, including utilities that are considered critical infrastructure.
Finallv, how on earth is it possible that easements need to be established for existing Citv
Utilities that are considered critical infrastructure?
From: Ken Reidy Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 10:32 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>;
Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for Public Hearing on Proposed Property Tax Ordinance
"y property tax expense over the past 7 years, on average, has increased roughly 9% per year.
I recently received an Official Notice of Assessed Value informing me that the County thinks my
assessed property values have increased another 5.8%. Looks like my property tax expense will
jump higher again next year.
My opinion is, Property Values in recent years have been dramatically impacted by the low
interest rate strategy promoted by the Federal Reserve Bank.
Until the Fed returns to a more historically normal interest rate policy, a strong argument can
be made that the City Council should do all it can to keep Property Tax rates as low as possible.
This is further supported by all the economic uncertainty swirling around related to Covid-19. It
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 46
is now being reported that Governor Inslee will announce new COVID-19 restrictions November
15, 2020.
The City Council has increasingly discussed the issue of Affordable Housing in Edmonds. Higher
property tax has a negative impact on Affordable Housing in Edmonds.
Please make a Motion to approve the City's EMS Property Tax Levy for 2021 with a 0% increase.
Should a rate decrease be considered due to all that is going on including all the uncertainty?
With so much attention being given to affordable housing, why would City Council approve a
Resolution for Substantial Need in order to levy property taxes using a limit factor of 101%,
notwithstanding a lower national inflation rate.
Even if the related dollar amounts seem small — it all adds up.
Please do not make housing in Edmonds even less affordable. The Property Tax revenue
increases that flow to Edmonds because of higher assessed values should be plenty without
also increasing property tax rates.
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:09 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>;
Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for Public Hearing on the 2021 Proposed City Budget
City of Edmonds government knows that it has operated with a flawed Code for at least 20
years. This includes both the Edmonds City Code (ECC) and the Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC).
During the October 25, 2005 City Council meeting, former Development Services Director
Duane Bowman said he had been describing the need to update the zoning code since he was
hired in 2000. The comment was also made that the City's Code dated to the 1980s and
piecemeal amendments made it difficult to use and administer.
Former City Attorney Scott Snyder stated in his November, 2007 City Attorney annual report
that the biggest issue at the start of 2007 was the Code Rewrite. Mr. Snyder stated the intent
was to begin the Rewrite last year and finish it this year (2007). Mr. Snyder summarized that
the Code Rewrite was approximately a year behind schedule as of November, 2007.
The 2009-2010 Budget included the following:
Maior 2009-2010 Budget Issues
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 47
Completion of the City's Shoreline Master Plan update and the Edmonds Community
Development Code rewrite will occur in 2009-2010.
Completion of the Code rewrite did not occur.
In late 2012, during the PUBLIC HEARING ON the 2013 BUDGET, I made public comment that
five years had passed since Mr. Snyder stated the intent and I questioned why
the Code Rewrite had still not been completed. I urged the Council to include the proper
amount in the 2013 budget to complete the long overdue Code Rewrite from start to finish.
Over the years, hundreds of thousands of dollars have been budgeted yet here we sit with
a Code that is still flawed and has been for at least 20 years.
There was an open house in March of 2015 trumpeting the City's just -
launched Code Rewrite process — a process advertised as a major update of the City's
development code. I attended that Open House in the hope that finally
the Code Rewrite would be finished. The City has a page on its website - but I don't see any
updates to this Code Rewrite website page for over 4 and a half years! The last update on that
website page was in March of 2016.
Please finish the Code Rewrite - including the ECC which is also
flawed. The Code Rewrite was supposed to be the top priority over a decade ago!
Please budget to complete the long overdue Code Rewrite from start to finish.
Please also provide full disclosure of all public funds spent on the Code Rewrite since 2006 as
well as an accounting of what the use of that public money has accomplished. Please make
sure all citizens know what percentage of the Code Rewrite has been completed.
Thank you.
From: BUCK
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2020 1:31 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Seaview-Perrinville
As a homeowner in Seaview just about 80th Ave. and 189th PL SW, I am asking the city council
to stop any new housing built in this area. Low or high income for that matter. Please allow the
forest and salmon and people to remain peacefully.
From: Ben Brodie
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:38 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Seaview Woods Hearing
I do not believe it is in the public interest to vacate any part or all of the 184th Street ROW.
Over development in this very steep and wooded area will only increase stormwater runoff into
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 48
Perrinville Creek and South County Park. South County Park is full of steep hillsides and deep
ravines. Too much water flowing into this area could destabilize the steep banks and result in
landslides.
The area that the developer is requesting the city vacate is now serving as a beneficial and
much needed wildlife corridor.
I am asking the City Council to vote no on these two vacation requests. Thank you.
Nancy Brodie
From: karen prater
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 7:04 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Save our trees!
No, no, no on Perrinville clear cut.
Too disastrous! Don't do it!
Karen Prater
From: cdfarmen
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 10:49 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 184th ROW vacation
Dear Council Members,
On November 17th you will be considering whether to approve or deny two requests
submitted by the landowner regarding the 184th St W right-of-way that runs through his
property.
The decision whether or not to vacate a portion of that right-of-way or remove the street
entirely from the city street map is not a matter whether we need the street in the future. It's
all about the public's interest in protecting our local environment, the loss of countless
significant trees and Perrinville Creek's watershed.
Allowing for the subdivision to go forward within current codes is one thing but, to allow
the expansion of the subdivision simply by vacating all or part of the street right-of-way is
another matter. The applicant has sufficient amount of land for the proposed 14 lot subdivision
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 49
without gaining access to more land, so, in his words, "[he ] can have more development
flexibility and increase average lot size to 13,383sf".
Any increase in lot size has the potential for the unnecessary removal of significant trees
and excess grading of steep slopes and ravines. Even the loss of a grove of six or seven trees is
too much. Larger lots will likely increase the probability of larger homes, more impervious
surfaces, increased stormwater runoff and further degradation of Perrinville Creek.
Therefore, I respectfully request that you do not approve either the applicants partial
right-of-way vacation request nor his request for the removal of 184th Street W from the city's
official street map as neither request is not in the public's interest.
Respectfully submitted,
Duane Farmen
Seaview area resident
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 17, 2020
Page 50