Cmd120120EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
December 1, 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
CALL 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
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir.
Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Mgr.
Dave Turley, Finance Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
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.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Council President Fraley-Monillas 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."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 1
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments. There are also
three public hearings on the agenda; Audience Comments are for topics not related to the public hearings.
Stephen Hearn, Edmonds, a resident on 3" Avenue South, advised Ralph Adams and others will speak
regarding the sewer odor problem in their neighborhood. He attached several years of emails regarding this
ongoing issue which the City has not addressed. The City has tried sewer plugs, cleaning wet wells,
changing pump schedules, taking readings, but none of that has made a difference and unfortunately, there
has not been a long term sustainable solution. In fact, the sewer smell is becoming even worse and now is
consistently present in their yard, so much so that they have to go inside, close doors and windows to keep
the smell out. In addition to the detrimental impact this was having on their quality of life, he was concerned
about potential health and economic impacts. He was confident there was a long term solution to this issue
and he asked the Council to act quickly on citizens' behalf.
Council President Fraley-Monillas advised a Councilmember is reporting they can see, but not hear the
meeting. She suggested a brief recess to contact David Rhode to have him address the issue. Mayor Nelson
suggested the Councilmember call in to 253-215-8782. Mr. Taraday advised one of the requirements for
holding public meetings in this manner is all Councilmembers need to be able to see and hear each other,
particularly hear each other so that issue needs to be resolved before proceeding. Mayor Nelson declared a
brief recess. The issue with Councilmember Olson's audio was resolved and the meeting was reconvened.
Ralph Adams, Edmonds, a resident on 2" d Avenue South, said for the last several years their neighborhood
has become engulfed in noxious sewer gas each afternoon and throughout the evening. Several neighbors
indicated to him that they have also been affected and have complained to the City but the problem remains
unresolved. He has been told by Public Works personnel that there is an agreement whereby affluent is
pumped up from Ronald Sewer District in King County each afternoon to the Edmonds wastewater facility.
Apparently the system becomes overwhelmed to the degree where positive pressure pushes sewer gas up
to the street level, engulfing the neighborhood in noxious fumes. This is severely impacting the residents
of this Edmonds neighborhood in terms of public health, property values and quality of life. The smell is
so strong that it is sometimes noticeable inside the house with the windows closed and on more than one
occasion, he has been driven away from his property with burning eyes, headache and nausea. His neighbor
across street has also indicated that members of his family have complained of symptoms related to long
term exposure to sewer gas. He spoke to Public Works Director Phil Williams on November 18"' and there
was a discussion about changing the pumping schedule. For the next 2-3 days, the pumping stopped and
the smell was abated, confirming that was the cause of the problem. Pumping has resumed along with the
daily stench that accompanies it.
Mr. Adams relayed his understanding that there were tentative plans to install an odor scrubber near City
Park which will draw air from the system and run it through a filter, but that solution appears to be many
months away. He questioned whether that project had been funded and when it would be completed. In the
meantime, he and his neighbors suffer from the daily stench of sewer odor courtesy of King County. Surely
there must be a more immediate solution available. This has a detrimental impact on the health of the
residents in the neighborhood, their quality of life and the value of their properties. The neighborhood stinks
and the problem seems to be getting worse. He asked the Council to get involved to fix the problem and
direct staff to resolve this issue and allocate budget to fix it. In the meantime, he requested short term relief
be implemented until a long term solution is in place.
Jennifer Baltich, Edmonds, a resident on 2nd Avenue South, spoke regarding the sewer issue. She and her
husband purchased their house two months ago and were excited to join the neighborhood but not the sewer
smell. Before making an offer on the house, they toured it in the early morning and did not smell the sewer
odor. They are very happy with the house but if they had visited the house in the evening and experienced
the smell, she was certain that would have influenced their decision to purchase the house. Although they
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 2
have not suffered with the issue as long as other neighbors, she wanted to speak regarding the prevalence
of the odor in the area.
Jim McQueen, Edmonds, a resident on 2nd Avenue South, said he just became aware of the problem this
evening and was very concerned that Edmonds was allowing this to happen. He was aware of sewer
problems in the past where neighbors had to be sent to a hotel for several evenings. It seemed obvious to
him that the line was being overused or had a blockage and that the City needed to take immediate action
to reduce the flow, clean the line or other action rather than continuing to use an inadequate line.
Tommy Kelly, Edmonds, a resident on 2nd Avenue South, said he moved into the neighborhood two
months ago and did not notice the odor when looking at the house. The day after the house closed, they
smelled the sewer odor and thought the problem was within the house. After talking with the neighbors and
walking around the block, they found the majority of the smell came from the corner of 2nd Avenue and
Elm Street. The smell is so bad that their 7-year old son doesn't want to go outside to play in the afternoon.
It has become a bigger issue because residents are home 24/7 due to working from home. He was unsure if
there was an immediate solution, and assumed the initial solution had been to pump during the day when
most residents were not home. It is a public health issue that needs to be resolved or at least an interim fix
while a long term fix is identified. It may be as simple as changing the pump schedule or reducing the flow
amount. He summarized like his neighbors, they are all very concerned.
Neil Tibbott, Edmonds, said he became familiar with the sewage problem on 2nd Avenue South a couple
weeks ago as a friend lives on the street and his kids' babysitter used to live on that street. In addition to
the odors, he was also concerned about other factors, 1) the neighborhood is very close to Deer Creek and
if there were ever an overflow of effluent from the sewer system, it would enter the creek and then the
marsh, and 2) this part of the City's infrastructure is obviously overused and is evidence of what can happen
when maintenance of the system is neglected. He expressed concern that not enough attention was given to
maintaining essential City infrastructure and citizens want transparency with regard to City facilities, the
facilities that keep them safe and healthy. As the Council considers the budget, he urged them to prioritize
maintenance of the facilities and assure citizens that leaders are paying attention, understand the importance
and will prioritize taking care of City systems that protect residents.
Heather Maiefski, Edmonds, a resident on Elm Street, relayed the same concern as her neighbors with
the sewer odor. They bought their house in 2011 and moved into it in 2013. She did not recall exactly when
they noticed the sewer odor, but it has been occurring for several years. She has young children and worries
about health effects of these toxic odors. It is also embarrassing to have company over and everyone smells
the obnoxious sewer odor. She echoed the comments her neighbors shared, advised she only realized tonight
that the neighbors were getting together to express their concerns to the Council so she wanted to join. She
had not realized until recently that everyone was smelling the odor.
Mike Schularick, Edmonds, a resident on 2,,d Avenue South, said he and his wife are healthcare workers,
working on the frontline with COVID. They have lived in their house for three years and have smelled the
sewer odor, but it seems to have gotten more pronounced in the last 3-4 months, possibly because use of
the sewer has increased because people are staying home. He and his wife both wear PPE at work to protect
themselves and others, but the City is not doing its part to protect citizens or neighbors from the sewer
fumes. He said it was easy to provide online sources that indicate sewer gases are toxic and noxious. Their
two-year old and the neighbors' kids refuse to go outside to play when the smells waft through the area. It
is particularly difficult with COVID that their child cannot go outside to play. He expressed appreciation
for all that Councilmembers do for the community and asked that this be addressed as soon as possible.
Julie Pusztai, Edmonds, a resident on 2nd Avenue South, said they live further north on the street so they
do not experience the profound smell in their yard but walking in that direction during those times, it is
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 3
absolutely overwhelming. There is a constant more subtle smell further down their street by the mailboxes
as well as a constant, faint sewer smell at the north end of City Park by the condominiums on 3`d Street.
She was uncertain those were related but assumed they were; more areas than just their street are impacted
and Deer Creek runs behind their house. The sewer odor is a concern for the wellbeing of the community,
beyond just their street given that there are odors near the park as well.
Lillie Compte, Edmonds, a resident on 3d Avenue South since 1998 and previously on Bella Coola Road,
said Edmonds often has a sewer stench. On a warm day in the summer when the breeze blows up the hill,
there is an odor. Something changed in the last nine months and the smell is unbearable. She often knocks
on sewer plant's door and in the past they passed out plugs to plug the sewer holes but that is no longer
done. Something definitely changed in last 9-12 months and the smell is overwhelming and unbelievably
bad. She did not know about this effort and received a letter in the mail saying it would be taken care of
which placated her as a neighbor. She was disheartened and disappointed to learn it was not being taken
care of. She begged the Council to support their small neighborhood. If it wasn't for COVID and the parks
were open, people in the park would have been complaining about the overwhelming smell.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
As she stated last week, Councilmember K. Johnson recused herself from the vote on Item 3, A Resolution
to Recommend Suspending the Issuance of Driving While License Suspended in the Third Degree.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON RECUSED HERSELF
FROM THE VOTE ON ITEM 3. The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF CLAIM AND PAYROLL CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
2. EDMONDS DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE 2021 WORK PLAN AND BUDGET
3. A RESOLUTION TO RECOMMEND SUSPENDING THE ISSUANCE OF DRIVING
WHILE LICENSE SUSPENDED IN THE THIRD DEGREE
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE PROPOSED 2021-2026 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM/CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
City Engineer Rob English advised Public Works Director Phil Williams; Parks, Recreation and Cultural
Services Director Angie Feser; and Deputy Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Shannon
Burley were also present. He provided a diagram showing components found only in the CIP and only in
the CFP and components found in both the CIP and CFP. The CIP contains 6-year maintenance projects
with funding sources, the CFP contains long range (20-year) capital project needs, and both contain 6-year
capital projects with funding sources.
Mr, English provided a summary of CIP fund numbers and the department managing each fund:
Fund
Description
Department
GF
Building Maintenance
Public Works
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 4
112
Street Construction
Public Works
125
Capital Projects Fund REET 2
Parks & Recreation/Public Works
126
Special Capital/Parks Acquisition REET 1
Parks & Recreation/Public Works
332
Parks -Construction Grant Funding)
Parks & Recreation
421
Water Projects
Public Works
422
Storm Projects
Public Works
423
Sewer Projects
Public Works
423
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Public Works
Mr. English referenced the column in the CIP that lists the decision package number. He reviewed the
following:
Public Works & Utilities
• 2020 Pavement Preservation
0 4.7 lane miles
o $1.OM project cost
• 2020 — Sidewalk Projects
o Dayton St. (7th Ave - 8th Ave)
■ #1 priority Short Walkway 2015 Transportation Plan
— Funded by State grant
o Walnut St. (3rd Ave — 4th Ave)
■ 43 priority Short Walkway 2015 Transportation Plan
— Completed by City concrete crew
— Funded by State grant
• 2020 — Highway 99 Revitalization Project
o Design Phase
■ 2.25 miles of landscaped center median/c-curb for vehicle safety
* HAWK Signal to improve pedestrian safety
■ Gateway Signs
112 Street Capital Fund
o 2021 Projects:
■ *Pavement Preservation Program (Cons) DP468
■ 76th/220th Intersection Improvements (Design) DP#69
■ *76th Ave Overlay Project (Design) DP#70
■ *Hwy 99 Revitalization Project (Design/ROW) DP#72
• Citywide Bicycle Improvements (Design) DP#73
■ *Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Project (Cons) DP#74
*Received REET Contribution
Transportation — 125 REET Fund
o 2021 Projects:
■ Pavement Preservation Program (Cons) DP#68
■ Pedestrian Safety Program (Cons) DP#75
■ Traffic Signal Upgrades (Cons) DP#76
■ Sidewalk Capital & Maintenance Program (Cons) DP#77
— Continues City concrete crew
Transportation — 126 REET Fund
o 2021 Projects:
■ Elm Way Walkway (Design) DP#58
— 6`" priority on short walkway list
■ 76th Ave Overlay (Design) DP#70
■ Hwy 99 Revitalization Project (Design/ROW) DP#72
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 5
• Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Project (Cons) DP#74
■ Guardrail Installation (Cons) DP#78
* Traffic Calming (Cons) DP#79
Utilities — Sewer, Water & Storm
• 2020 — Dayton St. Utility Improvement Project
0 3,950 ft watermain replacement
0 3,990 ft storm pipe replacement
0 1,990 ft sewer pipe replacement
0 1,930 ft sewer pipe rehabilitation
o New pavement section
2020 — Utility Replacement Programs
0 3,990 ft waterline replacement
0 1,580 ft storm pipe replacement
0 2,360 ft sewermain replacement
0 3,540 ft sewermain rehab
• 2020 Dayton St. Stormwater Pump Station
0 4,233 gpm pump capacity
o $2.1M project cost
o Funded by:
* State Grant
■ County Loan
■ Stormwater Funds
o Installed 2 pumps in new structure to pump stormwater during high tides to reduce flooding at
Dayton & SR 104
0 Utility Funds — 2021 Projects
o Water Utility:
■ 2022 Waterline Replacement Program (Design) DP#47
■ Overlay 0.7 lane miles affected by waterline replacements DP#48
* 2021 Watermain Replacement 6,200 ft (Cons) DP#51
o Storm Utility
■ Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Update DP#42
* 2021 Storm pipe replacement 2,360 ft (Cons) DP#53
* 2022 Storm pipe replacement (Design) DP#54
■ 175th St. Slope Repair (Design) DP455
■ Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration Related Projects DP#56,61,62
■ Overlay 0.25 lane miles affected by storm replacements DP#57
■ Seaview Phase 2 Infiltration Facility DP#59
■ Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects DP#60
o Sewer Utility
* 2021 sewermain replacement program 2,000 ft (Cons) DP#63
* Lake Ballinger Sewer Trunk Study DP#64
■ Overlay 0.1 lane miles affected by sewermain replacements DP#65
■ 3,000 ft of sewer pipe rehabilitation by cured -in place pipe method DP#66
■ 2022 sewermain replacement (Design) DP#67
o WWTP
• $26,121,000 Gasification System to replace our incinerator. Will reduce energy
consumption, reduce carbon emissions, and reduce operational costs. Negotiated contract
for delivery as an ESCO DP#43
• Started Trials of a new Nitrogen removal system to improve water quality in Puget Sound
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 6
Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Angie Feser explained the department's selection and
prioritization are founded in the 2016 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan (PROS):
• Collaborative efforts to meet recreation and cultural needs
■ Interconnected park system that includes cultural identity and natural environment
• Preserve and expand shoreline
■ Natural resource land for habitat conservation, recreation & environmental education
• Promote a healthy, active and engaged community through recreation
• Provide an engaged and vibrant community through arts and cultural opportunities
• High quality maintenance of parks and related amenities
Ms. Feser reviewed:
Parks 2021-2026 CIP/CFP Priorities
• Methodology
o Finish big projects
■ Waterfront Redevelopment
■ Civic Park
o Maintain Current Assets
• Playground
■ Trails and bridges
■ Athletic fields
■ Greenhouse replacement
o Prepare for future large projects
■ Marsh restoration
■ Marina Beach Park
■ 4"' Avenue Cultural Corridor
■ Land acquisition
• Parks CIP/CFP 2019 & 2020
o Waterfront Redevelopment — in progress
• Parks CIP 2019 & 2020
o Yost Pool Repairs — complete
■ Pool deck grates, CO2 injector and pool cover
■ Parks CIP 2020
o Marina Beach Park Design / Grant — complete
• Designed to 30%
■ Two grant applications submitted
— Scored #1 for ALEA ($500,000)
— Scored #19 of 80 for Local Parks ($500,000)
■ Total Project $5M
■ Willow Creek Daylighting / Supporting Marsh Restoration
o City Park Walkway — in progress
o Gateway sign — in progress
• Parks CIP/CFP 2019-2020
o Civic Park (Funds 125, 126, 332)
• DP #82
■ $12.1 M split between 2021 & 2022
■ Design Complete
• Permit Review Complete
■ Re -bid in January 2021
■ Ground Breaking Spring 2021
• 16 Months to Complete
■ Funding Sources:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 7
- $3.47M in Grant Funding
- $3.7M Bonds
- $1.35M Park Impact Fee's
- $1.38M REET Funding
- $1.86 GF Carryforward
- $400K Donations
* Parks CIP 2021
o Greenhouse Replacement (Fund 136 & 125)
■ DP#80
■ $50,000 Fund 136 (Parks Trust)
R $50,000 Fund 125 (BEET)
o Park Improvement & Capital Replacement Program (Fund 125)
a Life -cycle major maintenance to prolong usage and/or increase capacity:
- Resurfacing
- Replacement
- Upgrading
■ DP#81
■ $155,000 Annually
o Park Land and Open Space Acquisition Program (Fund 126)
R $700,000 Reserved
R $200,000 from previous years & $500,000 in 2021
R Programmed $200,000 per year in future years
o Fishing Pier Repair (Fund 332)
■ DP#83
$54,425 Carryforward
• Funds from WDFW
■ Bid Spring 2020
■ New plan for spring/summer 2021
■ Parks CIP 2022-2026
o Future Improvements:
■ Civic Park Continuation in 2022
■ Marina Beach Design & Construction
R 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor
• Park Land and Open Space Acquisition Program
• Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting)
• Waterfront Walkway Connection - Ebb Tide Section
■ Trail Development
■ Sports Field/Playground Partnership
Mr. English reviewed:
• CIP/CFP Schedule
o July
is City staff begins development of capital budgets
o August/September
• Submit proposed Capital budget to Finance
• Prepare draft CFP and CIP
o October
■ Planning Board; Public Hearing (October 14th & 28th)
o November/December
R Planning Board; Public Hearing (November 12th)
it City Council Presentation (November 12th)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 8
City Council Public Hearing (December 1 st)
■ Adopt CFP w/ Budget into the Comprehensive Plan
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing.
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, speaking on behalf of Save Our Marsh community group, said the group
previously submitted letters about the marsh restoration project in the draft CFP and today send the Council
a follow-up letter with specific recommendations for changes to the 2021 CFP. Specifically, the group urges
the Council to delete the marsh restoration related projects on pages 63 and 64 of the draft CFP. It is a
disservice to the public and taxpayers to have CFP suggest any estuary restoration costs in plans until the
disposition of the old Unocal property is resolved. There is no way of knowing costs or how the project
might be structured. Further, the draft CFP puts the marsh restoration project incorrectly under a stormwater
heading, further basis for totally deleting that project. Once the Unocal property issue is resolved, a new
marsh restoration project could be placed in a future CFP, perhaps in 2022 or 2023 under a parks heading
since the marsh is a wildlife reserve not a storm basin. The Save Our Marsh group acknowledges stormwater
related projects are needed to preserve the Edmonds Marsh such as removing stormwater pollutants that
drain directly into the marsh from SR 104 and Harbor Square. Save Our Marsh suggests after deleting the
current projects on pages 63 and 64 of the CFP, the Council consider a stormwater project at significant
less cost and a suggested description of this project was provided in the letter the group submitted to Council
today. He thanked the Council in advance for getting the marsh restoration project back on track to actually
benefit salmon, wildlife and future generations of Edmonds citizens.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Councilmember Olson [portion of her comment was inaudible] post office property as one of the abatement
opportunities for dealing with the stormwater runoff into Perrinville Creek; she offered information she
obtained from PCC on that subject. She was unaware of what the City would have access to do on the post
office property, but with the amount of concrete in that location, it seems like an opportunity. Mr. Williams
suggested she repeat the beginning of her comment. Councilmember Olson said it was in regard to DP #60
and whether a stormwater collection and storage tank similar to the one at PCC could be incorporated into
that project. Mr. Williams answered staff has looked at that site and has approached the post office, but it
is very difficult to get answers from the federal government. There is some flat area there and if they would
agree to allow the City to construct a vault under the parking lot, a significant amount of stormwater could
be directed to the vault, delaying entry into Perrinville Creek. He agreed it was a location for possible
project and others have also been identified in the Perrinville basin. The Seaview project that is currently
underway, also in the Perrinville basin, includes distributed and cluster rain gardens.
Councilmember Olson suggested it may be less expensive to do an above ground storage tank like PCC's.
Mr. Williams said most property owners, whether the federal government or a successor, would likely not
want the interference that would represent to development of the property. He could easily see a vault under
a paved area which would be easy for the City to maintain. All the projects in recent years have been
underground. Councilmember Olson said she was glad staff was thinking about that.
Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled discussions about curb cuts and the $30-40 million cost to be
in compliance, commenting she did not see much of that work in 2021. Mr. Williams answered the cost
was $146 million; a lot of the transportation projects will include curb ramps as ADA compliance in general
is a huge part of any project. In addition, as private properties are redeveloped, depending on the location
and the project, they also contribute to the inventory of compliant walkways and curb ramps. The City's
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 9
concrete crew is also repairing existing sidewalks as well as building new short sidewalk segments. Any
long sidewalk segment is unlikely to be done inhouse; staff seeks grant funding for those such as Safe
Routes to Schools or other state funds that can be matched with local dollars such as gas tax. He summarized
a lot has been accomplished in 2020 and a lot will be done in 2021.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding of Mr. Williams' response that a lot of the
ADA improvements will be done via redevelopment or other transportation projects, not specifically to
provide ADA accessibility. Mr. Williams said that requires funding. The sidewalk crew is included in the
budget and there is a request for additional funding primarily for concrete which he hoped the Council
would approve. As much as possible is being done inhouse as well as transportation projects to improve
deficits over time.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked Ms. Feser if she received his questions yesterday via email. Ms. Feser
answered she did not. Councilmember Distelhorst asked where potential local funds come from if the marsh
is in Parks and grants for the marsh require local match, whether it would it be from the General Fund. He
also asked whether the local match come from utility rate funds if the marsh was in Public Works. Ms.
Feser answered City match for those grants could be park impact fees, REET, General Fund or other grants.
Mr. Williams said the answer was the same for Public Works, a grant can be used to match -another grant.
In the end, there will be local funding and both Parks and Public Works would use REET funds to match
grants. As the entire system handles a tremendous amount of urban runoff, it is appropriate for stormwater
to be involved in projects that will accomplish better stormwater management and treatment. He saw
stormwater as a player in matching grants for the marsh restoration.
Ms. Feser added it is important to have the marsh project identification and allocation in the adopted CFP
and CIP in order to be eligible for grant applicants. Even if the funding is not secured, those projects must
be in the CFP and CIP. Mr. Williams said stormwater fund cannot be used for everything related to the
marsh; for example stormwater would not be appropriate to match grants for redoing Marina Park or
plantings on the edge of marsh. Stormwater would be involved in solving the hydrologic problems that the
marsh has represented over time; the daylighting project is probably the best example where stormwater
could play a significant role.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she plans to have the Salmon Recovery Council speak to the Council next
year as a lot of opportunities are not being addressed related to salmon recovery. She referred to a Q&A on
the decision package related to non -departmental regarding the City making the bond payment for Civic
from Fund 126. She asked if there was a debt service fund, recalling there were plans to develop a policy.
She was concerned making the bond payment from Fund 126 might limit funding available for potential
purchases, noting Fund 125 and 126 were drawn down by work on the Waterfront Center. She asked if
there was a dedicated fund prior to this year. Mayor Nelson advised Finance Director Dave Turley was not
present to answer that question.
With regard to funding for the marsh, COUncilmember Olson said after talking to people who have
historically been involved in decision about funding, it seemed to her what would make sense was to have
some in Public Works for the things related to stormwater and more in Parks so that the Parks Director was
not supervising Public Works jobs and vice versa. She referred to past Planning Board minutes where a
staff member said it had historically been in multiple funds in different areas, but that had been criticized
so it was consolidated into one place. Now citizens are saying most of it should be in Parks.
Mr. Williams said stormwater has a significant role, primarily the daylighting of Willow Creek and Public
Works has been working on that for over decade. That is the hydrologic piece which is the most expensive
part of the overall restoration. The daylighting project, solving the hydrologic piece and creating a
daylighted, open channel to Puget Sound, may be two-thirds to three -fourths of the cost of the overall marsh
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 10
estuary restoration project. Ms. Feser added there is a lot of technical expertise found in Public Works that
is not found in Parks related to this project. To have funding in Public Works, for example for the
daylighting of Willow Creek, is important. The money can be put in the Parks column, but Parks will rely
on Public Works to help with that work. Parks will definitely play a role in some of the Parks components
such as environmental education, public access, etc., but it all goes hand -in -hand.
Ms. Feser pointed out there will be numerous grant sources for that project including federal and state;
some could be led by Parks and some by Public Works depending on the nature of the grant application and
the related work. This is a very complex project that requires a team approach. Mr. Williams anticipated
private foundation support as well as possibly federal grants. It will be interesting to see how the new federal
administration embraces estuary restoration and how much funding they will make available as that came
to a screeching halt a few years ago.
In terms of this year's budget, CFP and CIP, Councilmember Olson asked where the $450,000 carryover
which is unlikely to be used this year because the land transfer will not happen, will be placed and how
does that correlate with the Save Our March group's recommendation. Mr. Williams responded the
$450,000 was a carryover from the 2020 budget that was not spent because the land ownership issue
prevented the project from proceeding into a more detailed design, new alignment, etc. The thought was to
carry that forward as placeholder and wait to see what happens in 2021. In recent meetings with Ecology,
it appears Ecology is getting closer to the point of having a final cleanup action plan in place and may even
make an announcement in the first couple months of next year. It would then go out for public comment
and Ecology would develop a final cleanup action plan possibly by mid -year 2021. How much longer it
would take depends on what is in the action plan. Some of the things they are looking at may be relatively
straightforward. Recognizing the site is approximately 98% cleaned up based on volume or total
contaminants, additional work may not be necessary depending on the future land use. From Edmonds'
perspective, the future land use should be habitat and restoring the Edmonds Marsh and not development
or commercial use of the property. If that is the case, there may be opportunities to get started much more
quickly than anticipated, it could even happen in 2021. When applying for grants, it is good to show there
is money in the budget set aside for a project. Grant applications always ask if funds are set aside for a
match and to pursue the project.
Councilmember Olson asked once the funds are in the budget, does staff come back to Council before the
funds are spent. Mr. Williams answered of course; not a penny would be spent without getting explicit
Council approval regarding how would be spent to further marsh restoration. The proposal is to include the
funds as a placeholder, see what happens in 2021 and if there is an opportunity to get started, staff will
come back to Council and describe the opportunity and the cost.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was uncomfortable with the Council determining which
department should/shouldn't do work and asked if that was the Council's responsibility. Mr. Taraday
answered it depends, a decision regarding how to fund something and which funding sources to use for a
project is certainly an appropriate endeavor for the City Council. Assigning certain staff to do particularly
things would not be appropriate.
Councilmember L. Johnson commented the marsh is part of the overall watershed hydrological function.
Public Works currently oversees stormwater management and restoration of areas like Lake Ballinger,
Perrinville Creek and other key areas. It makes sense that Public Works would be directly involved in
overseeing marsh function as well. She had difficulty with the thought of separating it from Public Works
because it seems appropriate that Public Works would be directly involved.
Councilmember Buckshnis disagreed, pointing out marsh restoration has been in Parks Fund 125, 126 and
332 for years. When Parks Director Carrie Hite left, it was moved to Fund 422 which is paid via utility rates
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 11
which were increased by 9.5% last year. She reiterated her plans to have the Salmon Recovery Council talk
to the Council. This is a very complex project, Public Works runs the project but funding goes through the
RCO process. Combining the Marina Beach project and showing salmon recovery from Puget Sound into
the marsh, it becomes a holistic project which is basically what Save Our Marsh is saying. There is no
reason to include a dollar amount because that is unknown. She referred to comments she made last year
when the project was included in stormwater. She agreed things like sediment were related to stormwater,
but she did not support a cost of $17 million for the marsh restoration because the cost was unknown. The
Council controls the budget and fund numbers; she offered to review information with any Councilmember.
As Ms. Feser stated, there need to be placeholders in the different funds. There are millions available in
state and federal grants for salmon recovery via RCO or PROS Plan, not stormwater.
Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding that the Edmonds Marsh estuary restoration Fund 017
could be accessed by Public Works for the stormwater projects as well as Parks and could be used to store
funds. Mr. Williams said that is probably generally correct, the only restriction is that stormwater finds,
which is an enterprise fund, need to fund things related to stormwater needs and priorities. If the work that
will eventually be done with that funding meets that criteria, it could be included in a project fund like the
rnarsh fund or any other fund for a capital project as long as money goes toward things that are eligible for
stormwater expenditures. Whoever provides funding will want to know how their funds will be used in the
project and that has to be tracked. Whether it is stormwater, the 332 fund or the 017 fund is what the City
does from an accounting standpoint and is not the key issue.
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE #4200 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON
SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
Environment Program Manager Kernen Lien explained the Council adopted Ordinance 4200 on November
2" which established a 4-month moratorium on the acceptance of any subdivision applications for
properties that contained 8 or more significant trees per 10,000 square feet of lot area. Significant tree was
defined as a tree with an 8-inch diameter. Pursuant to state law, when the City Council adopts a moratorium,
they must hold a public hearing within 60 days of the adoption of the ordinance. Ordinance 4200 set the
public hearing for December I". No later than the next regular Council meeting immediately following the
hearing, the Council shall adopt findings on the subject of the moratorium and either justify its continued
imposition or cancel the moratorium. There are two public hearings tonight, the first is on the moratorium
and the other is regarding corresponding code changes. Both the moratorium and code changes were done
to allow the City adequate time to complete the tree code update that is currently underway.
Mayor Nelson opened public hearing.
Eric Thuesen, Edmonds, a general contractor, builder and land developer, said he has reviewed all the
information regarding the moratorium. There is a track of education that comes from staff to the Planning
Board and eventually to City Council. A lot of information has to be provided to make decision like this,
to have a moratorium, what is being done with land, lots and trees so it will be supported by public. He was
surprised to learn that no survey was done, recalling surveys were often done after the work was done and
find that the public did not support it. Not enough information has been provided by planning staff. He
realized planning staff s limitations, they are not aware of all the disciplines involved in developing land.
No information regarding the best tree science has been provided to show how much area is need to protect
a tree based on diameter. Mr. Lien provided some site plans, identifying what land would usually be taken
trp in development process by impermeable areas, water, sewer, etc. However, he failed to mention when
developing an RM (residential multiple) property, nearly all the land is taken up including the setback after
the storm drainage system is included. That is important to understanding the survivability of a tree. He did
not support the moratorium as a lot more work needed to be done and more time was necessary for it to be
successful. He encouraged the planning department to seek assistance from the other disciplines who know
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 12
exactly what happens when a property is developed, what land is available and whether the trees will
survive. He summarized several cities have tried this including Lynnwood and they have given up.
Andy Ball, Edmonds, explained he is a property owner who would like to remove trees on his property,
something he has been planning since he purchased the property two years ago. He lives in the house, is
not a developer and has no plans to develop. He does not have 8 significant trees per 10,000 square feet on
his lot, yet he is being told he cannot take trees down. Apparently his lot is subdividable, but he is not
applying to subdivide and does not have 8 significant trees per 10,000 square feet. He did not understand
why he not able to take the trees down. He has planning to take down the trees for a long time, it is very
expensive and he finally has the money to do it and now is being told he cannot. He has been talking with
the City for over a year about removing the trees and now he is not allowed to proceed. The trees he would
like to take down are fairly close to his house and are in the middle of his yard. He asked why he was not
able to take down the trees.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the moratorium affected a property that is zoned single family and over
10,000 square feet. Mr. Lien answered Mr. Ball's comments were actually related to the second public
hearing. Ordinance 4201 includes two zoning code changes, one related to information on a subdivision
application and the other related to exemptions from tree cutting permits. Before Ordinance 4200 was
passed, developed single family properties that were not subdividable into more than one additional lot and
had no critical areas were exempt from permitting requirements. With the adoption of Ordinance 4201, the
subdividable portion was removed so in order to be exempt, it must be a developed single family property
that is not subdividable. In Mr. Ball's case, there is no critical area, but there is enough area to subdivide
the property so he does not fall under the exemption. If the trees were hazard trees, they could be removed
under the exemption, but if they are not hazard trees, Ordinance 4201 removed the exemption for developed
single family properties that are subdividable.
As Mayor Nelson began to move onto the next agenda item, Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of
order, whether the Council needed to take action.
Mr. Taraday said a resolution needs to be prepared that supports the moratorium if that is the Council's
direction. Unless the Council expressed otherwise, he assumed the Council wanted resolutions prepared
related to Ordinances 4200 and 4201 to justify the continuance of the moratorium and the interim
regulations. Those resolutions are not in the packet and will be prepared for the next regular meeting.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of order, asking if the Council should discuss findings of fact after the
public hearings. Mr. Taraday said unless the Council wanted to give specific direction regarding particular
findings of fact that they would like to find, he will work with staff to draft a resolution to incorporate the
appropriate finding of fact, put them on a future meeting agenda, and Council could amend if they saw fit.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
CONTINUE THE MORATORIUM ORDINANCE 4200 AND DIRECT THE ATTORNEY AND
STAFF TO DRAFT FINDINGS OF FACT FOR A FUTURE MEETING. UPON ROLL CALL,
MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE
AND L. JOHNSON VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO,
AND NO RESPONSE FROM COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 13
PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE #4201 ESTABLISHING EMERGENCY
REGULATIONS TO ACCOMPANY THE SUBDIVISION MORATORIUM
Environment Program Manager Kernen Lien explained this is the accompanying ordinance. There are two
parts to the ordinance, 1) requiring information on a complete application for a subdivision to determine
whether a property met the density requirement for trees (8 significant trees on a 10,000 square foot lot),
and 2) the change to the exemptions. He explained the exemption was changed because if a site was exempt
under the existing exemptions, the existing trees could be cut down and then an application for a subdivision
submitted and not meet the density requirements. To Mr. Ball's comment, while that property no longer
meets the exemption, he could either apply for a tree cutting permit or if the trees were documented as
hazard trees, they could be removed.
Councilmember Distelhorst raised a point of order and requested staff reach out to Councilmember K.
Johnson to ensure she was okay. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
Mayor Nelson advised Councilmember K. Johnson was unreachable by phone so he contacted Acting Chief
Lawless to have officers do a welfare check.
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing.
Andy Ball, Edmonds, relayed his understanding that he needs to contact Mr. Lien about the process for
applying for a permit to take the trees down. He asked if the trees were allowed to be taken down, permitted
or not, during the moratorium. He said this is an infringement on his property rights. He bought the home
two years ago and the difficulty to take trees down would have influenced his decision. He summarized the
permitting process for someone like him may be cost prohibitive and that is not right.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
With regard to Mr. Ball's inquiry, Councilmember Olson asked for confirmation that the moratorium
ordinance and this ordinance were four months in duration. Mr. Lien confirmed they were both four month
ordinances. When the moratorium sunsets and the new tree code is in place, Councilmember Olson asked
if someone in Mr. Ball's circumstance, a private citizen who does not intend to subdivide, would be
restricted under the new tree code, assuming it was approved in its draft from, in the same way he was
restricted by the moratorium. Mr. Lien said the exemption in the draft tree code for developed single family
properties was modified similar to Ordinance 4201 for similar reasons. The draft tree code is applicable to
subdivisions, short subdivisions, and multifamily and other properties are not exempt from the tree code.
The exemption was modified to apply to developed single family properties that were not subdividable. If
the draft tree code is approved in its current form, it will have the same impact on Mr. Ball's property. The
permitting process would be changed under the draft tree code. A tree cutting permit is currently a Type II
decision which is $1000 plus application fee; in the draft tree code it would be a Type I decision which is
a $300 permit application. He summarized the exemption would still apply but the permitting process would
be different if the draft tree code were adopted in its current form. Councilmember Olson observed a private
citizen who does not intend to subdivide will still be affected. Mr. Lien answered yes, under the draft tree
code.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
CONTINUE WITH THE MORATORIUM BECAUSE IT IS STILL IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
TO MAINTAIN THE MORATORIUM FOR THE FULL FOUR MONTHS AND/OR UNTIL WE
HAVE ESTABLISHED A NEW TREE CODE.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she did not support the ordinance due to her concerns about slowing
up housing. She understood this could affect private property, single family and multifamily homes and she
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 14
did not believe it was in the public's interest to shut down development across Edmonds when there were
initially concerns about one area.
Mayor Nelson announced Councilmember K. Johnson had returned to the meeting.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
8. NEW BUSINESS
1. MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONTINGENT LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE
EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT
Finance Director Dave Turley explained in 2008, the Edmonds Public Facilities District (PFD) issued
$4,000,000 of Sales Tax Obligation and Refunding Bonds. In 2018 in order to take advantage of lower
interest rates, the PFD refinanced these bonds by issuing a Note to First Financial Northwest Bank
(FFNWB). The PFD and the City signed a Contingent Loan Agreement (CLA) whereby the City agreed to
purchase Certificates of Deposit which FFNWB would then hold as collateral for the note between the PFD
and FFNWB. Due to the pandemic, the ECA has been unable to host performances, meetings and events in
their facility since early March 2020 which has had a devastating financial impact to the organization. They
have responded by laying off more than 50% of their staff, and reducing all remaining staff members' hours
by 50%. Despite these actions, they continue to face an operating deficit and cash flow challenge. To assist
with their cash flow problems, The PFD asked FFNWB for a modification to their loan agreement, where
the PFD defer their December 31, 2020 principal payment to December 31, 2021, and extend the maturity
date for the loan out for one additional year to 2029.
Mr. Turley explained as the City is a party to the loan agreement, two motions are needed in order to move
forward with the loan modification. First, authorizing the Mayor to sign the second amendment to the CLA
as updated and included in the packet and second, pass an ordinance authorizing the amendments to
documents related to extending the maturity of the promissory note.
Council President Fraley-Monillas, Council liaison to the PFD, said she has been following this very closely
and it is needed to keep the ECA alive. The ECA has had some success with fundraising, but not enough to
keep moving forward as usual. As Mr. Turley mentioned, they have laid off a great majority of their staff
and cut all staffs hours. Some small events are occurring occasionally but there is very little activity.
Extending the loan does not cost the City anything and she encouraged Council to support the ECA as it is
an integral part of the City.
Councilmember Olson commented this is a great opportunity and she thanked FFNWB for offering this.
She hoped people who were in a similar predicament with their mortgages and businesses who need
financial assistance would pursue something similar. This is a lifeline for the ECA and she will support it.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support. She asked Mr. McIalwain to explain the mathematics,
relaying some people asked her if the PFD planned to double up on principal payments or extend the loan
a year. Executive Director Joe McIalwain explained the 2020 principal payment will be added to the end
of the term. The loan is structured so the interest charged each year is only charged on the remaining
principal. Unlike a bond issue where interest payments stay equal or grow over time, in this case the interest
payment greatly diminishes at the end of the term. In the final year, the PFD would only pay approximately
$20,000 or less in interest, which is the total cost to the PFD for the loan modification.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 15
CONTINGENT LOAN AGREEMENT AS UPDATED AND INCLUDED IN THE PACKET
TONIGHT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO PASS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN
DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH EXTENDING THE MATURITY OF A PROMISSORY
NOTE ISSUED BY THE EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT TO FIRST FINANCIAL
NORTHWEST BANK; AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BE EFFECTIVE. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. INTENT TO CONFIRM MUNICIPAL JUDGE APPOINTMENT
HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson explained this is a resolution of intent to confirm the municipal judge
appointment. The City has gone through a recruitment process including interviews with Council and
Mayor Nelson has indicated his intent to appoint Whitney Rivera. The actual appointment cannot be made
until the judicial seat is vacated by the current judge. The resolution confirms the Council's approval of the
intent to confirm; confirmation will occur at the January 12"' meeting on Consent and Ms. Rivera will be
sworn in.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked why the confirmation would be done on January 12"' instead of the first
meeting in January. Ms. Neill Hoyson answered the position is not vacated until January 10"' which is Judge
Coburn's last official day as the judge. The conformation will occur at the next meeting, January 12".
Ms. Neill Hoyson advised "November" in the resolved statement will be changed to December.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1461, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING INTENT TO CONFIRM THE
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF WHITNEY RIVERA AS THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL COURT
JUDGE, WHICH POSITION IS EXPECTED TO BECOME VACANT ON JANUARY 11, 2021,
WHEN JUDGE COBURN'S RESIGNATION BECOMES EFFECTIVE. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
3. FINANCE DIRECTOR CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT
HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson advised the City conducted a recruitment process, Council interviewed
three candidates and provided feedback to Mayor Nelson. Mayor Nelson selected Dave Turley for
appointment.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO
APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF DAVE TURLEY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE PROVIDING MAYOR TEMPORARY AUTHORITY TO
USE TOOLS TO ADDRESS ECONOMIC EMERGENCY
Development Services Director Shane Hope advised this subject was discussed this at a prior City Council
meeting and some of the specifics were reviewed. The discussion revolved around the City dealing with
COVID since February and different things that evolve over time including significant economic impacts.
Sometimes there are surprises that require quick decisions and possibly suspension of procedural matters.
An emergency ordinance to suspend certain code titles was introduced at the Council's last meeting. During
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 16
discussion, there was interest in revisiting this tool to allow suspension if needed during COVID, strictly
related to economic crises, in a timely manner by the Mayor.
Ms. Hope explained the revised ordinance reduced the number of affected titles in an attempt to be as
narrow as possible but still recognizing things that may need quick action and may not need to go through
a full code process in an emergency situation. Instead of the nine titles included in the original version of
the ordinance, there are only five titles, and even though the whereas clauses address economic crises and
COVID, language was added to the body of the ordinance. The 30 day notice to Council in the original
ordinance of any suspension or waiver of code seconds was changed to a 5 day maximum notification. If
the Council approves the ordinance, it can be repealed or changed at any time. The ordinance sunsets after
90 days and is intended to be an emergency interim response to provide Mayor Nelson with tools in the
event they are needed. The tools may not be needed, but this ordinance was proposed to be on safe side.
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if staff could address the questions he emailed yesterday. Ms. Hope
suggested he remind her of the questions. Councilmember Distelhorst said he will find them and ask in the
next round.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she would also locate the questions she emailed to staff.
Councilmember Olson said she felt very strongly that there was more than enough technology at the
Council's disposal and more than enough willingness among Councilmembers to meet on an emergency
basis to move forward anything should be moved forward. Staff and the Mayor are in the best position to
know what those things are, but there is a lot of value for things to come to Council for that actual approval,
the checks and balances of the different arms of government. The Council has responsibility for how money
is spent whether they delegate that authority now to say the Mayor can take action without involving the
Council or whether the Council hears and weighs in. To the point of being there for the businesses and
citizens, she assured the Council was full committed, willing and able. She supported having specifics
presented to Council; it takes four Councilmembers to have a quorum and hold an emergency meeting and
take action. The codes that would be waived in the ordinance were put in place by past Councils or this
Council so it should be the Council that decides whether they are waived and under what circumstances.
Councilmember K. Johnson made the following statement:
"I strongly oppose granting the mayor legislative powers during the COVID-19 pandemic. I am opposed
because it is un-American, it puts too much power into one individual and finally because the mayor may
ask but can only gain these powers if the Council grants him the powers.
Americans have elections every four years to select our president, governors and mayors, all of which are
the chief executive officer of their political jurisdiction. This is our treasured American way of governing.
It does not matter that Mayor Nelson wants these powers or that Council President Fraley-Monillas agrees
with him. The mayor does not have a vote and the council president only has one vote. It would require
four votes to reassign Council authority to the mayor and five votes to enact an emergency ordinance.
I ask each councilmember to consider your oath of office and continue to do your duty to the City of
Edmonds. We should not shirk our duty or give away our powers to make it easier for the mayor to run the
city.
The mayor's job is to execute the laws and regulations of the city. The council's job is to legislate polices,
regulation and make all financial decisions. The municipal judge's job is to interpret and carry out the law.
Together these represent the balance of powers which our founding fathers felt were essential to our
American form of democracy.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 17
I urge citizens and business owners to write to the city council or provide testimony at the Tuesday City
Council to share your opinion. Send your emails to council@edmondswa.gov.
I think that the city council has demonstrated that we can meet with the mayor any time and any day at his
request to solve problems related to the COVID-19 pandemic. What I hope we are unwillingly to do is
abdicate our roles and responsibilities as the legislative branch of the Edmonds city government."
Councilmember L. Johnson said given the language in the ordinance, passing the ordinance would ordain
the Council as unable to be nimble and flexible enough to act expediently in a time of emergency. She
referred to the narrative of the Council being limited to moving at a tempo that is best suited to actions such
as welcome sign design deliberations, kind of a bureaucratic equivalent of a slow waltz. The fact is, in the
early days of the pandemic, the Council demonstrated its ability to quick -step when called on in a time of
crisis, convening and acting within a matter of days, not the weeks or months stated in the agenda memo.
That willingness to serve at a moment's notice has not changed.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he was very supportive of many of the steps the City was taking including
the streateries ordinance which he hoped would return to Council as soon as possible so there were no gaps
in outdoor dining for businesses who were able to partake. Since August, the Recovery Taskforce has been
meeting monthly so if Mr. Doherty would like to reinstate weekly meetings, he was more than happy to
attend weekly meetings with the City's directors to ensure everything was happening in a nimble fashion.
He thanked the business owners that he spoke with over the past week, many of them supplying specific
examples of things that would help them. He passed those suggestions on to Mayor Nelson; some are
outside the realm of the City's authority such as federal funding and grants the City does not have but
others, like today's announcement about the City providing compostable containers was a specific request
he heard from businesses and he was very supportive of the City taking those actions. He remains dedicated
to working collaborative in the best interests of the City and using the energy to get positive benefits for
residents and business owners.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked business owners in many areas including downtown, Perrinville and
Highway 99 who spoke to her, noting she was surprised to learn some were not aware of the proposed
emergency ordinance. She continues to be committed to the City and business owners and believed the
Council could pivot on a dime and do what needs to be done. The special event permit is currently in place
and she did not know why some businesses would not just do pop tents knowing the streateries ordinance
was coming. Like Councilmember L. Johnson said, the Council did a quick -step, meeting on a Sunday to
pass ordinance 6.60, an emergency ordinance that still needs to come back to Council, which contains
sufficient powers for the Mayor.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she would support the ordinance for the same reasons she stated
last week, recognizing it would be a 6-1 vote. She also met with business owners and firmly believed this
temporary, 90-day ordinance for COVID-related issues was not harmful to the Council process, but will
acquiesce to the other six Councilmembers' wishes.
Councilmember Paine said an emergency ordinance is best when it is specific regarding what needs to be
addressed as well as limited in scope. The entire Council has expressed interest and desire to do what they
can and provide information to the Administration in response to this health crisis. No one has a crystal
ball; the measures that the planning department is putting into place are really the right steps and those will
come to Council fairly quickly. She looked forward to seeing those as soon as possible. She expressed
appreciation for all the work that has been done to be as flexible and creative as possible in addressing the
problem, particularly related to compostables which are better for the environment.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, SUSPENDING CERTAIN CITY CODES THAT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 18
COULD HAMPER THE CITY'S EMERGENCY ECONOMIC RESPONSE, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO USE PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY AND OTHER PUBLIC REAL PROPERTY TO
SUPPORT THE CITY'S EMERGENCY ECONOMIC RESPONSE, DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY NECESSITATING IMMEDIATE ADOPTION AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS
ORDINANCE, AND ESTABLISHING A SUNSET CLAUSE. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A
SECOND.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO SET THIS ASIDE INDEFINITELY
Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, asking how could something be set aside
indefinitely if there was no motion on the floor. Mr. Taraday agreed, advising subsidiary motions are
typically applied to a main motion that is pending and in this case, there is no motion pending.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
2. BUDGET DELIBERATION AND OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS CHANGES TO THE
PROPOSED BUDGET
Finance Director Dave Turley advised this is Council's opportunity to propose and discuss changes to the
preliminary budget.
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Councilmember Paine restated the following amendment: Include in the budget a 3-year long term
temporary position for the purpose of working on a code rewrite of the land use code, a long standing
project for the Council. The cost is $140,000 for the first year and would be funded from the ending fund
balance
Council President Fraley-Monillas requested when Councilmembers were referring to specific decision
packages, they describe the item and not just provide the decision package number.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked the approximately 10 citizens who contacted her and said their
questions are summarized on packet pages 357 - 359. She referred to the question she asked above when
Mr. Turley was not present regarding Fund 126 on page 57, paying the Civic Field bond from Fund 126,
noting utility bonds are paid by utility rates. She was concerned that paying the Civic Field bond from Fund
126 would hinder the ability to purchase property using funds in Fund 126. Mr. Turley answered there were
2-3 different reason this was done. There is a debt service fund, the utility bond payments are transferred
out of the utility fund into a debt service fund to make the bond payment. With regard to Civic Field bonds,
the principal and interest came from the General Fund last year. That was changed for policy reasons and
there are a few reasons to make the payments out of the REET fund. First, as a general rule, capital projects
should not be paid for out of the General Fund if at all possible. Streets are funded from the General Fund,
but things like parks or buildings should not be funded with General Fund money if at all possible. Second,
it is always better policy to use restricted funds before unrestricted funds. REET funds are designed to pay
for something like Civic Field, so it makes more sense for that to be the source of the funds that go into the
debt service fund. Third, every year Parks and Public Works negotiates how to spend BEET funds; if
$275,000 in Civic Field bond payments are paid out of the General Fund, it is not as transparent as having
it come out of the REET fund. For example, if REET funds are divided 50150 between Parks and Public
Works, the amount paid from the General Fund would need to be included.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if Marina Beach was paid out of Fund 126. Ms. Feser answered the
Marina Beach bond is paid out of Fund 126; there are four things paid out of Fund 126 related to park
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 19
bonds. Mr. Turley summarized it makes more sense to pay for Civic Field out of REET instead of the
General Fund.
Councilmember Olson suggest decreasing the human service program by $25,000 and add that to the
support of the senior center. The justification is this returns the level of support to 2020 levels. In 2020 the
senior center has experienced a surge in the provision of free services and a grossly diminished revenue
stream from paid services. This is an identified need in the community that the senior center is already
positioned to respond to and is responding to as their finances allow. These social services are better
provided by the entity that has been providing them in the past rather than a not -yet -defined new social
services department.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if amendments that had already been submitted needed to be officially
announced or were they worked into the budget. Mr. Turley said the process is up to the Council. At some
point all the proposals need to be outlined and voted on individually. it is up to the Council whether to
discuss them tonight. He could summarize everything discussed tonight so they could easily be voted on
next week or the Council could vote tonight.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
EXTEND FOR 15 MINUTES TO 10:13 P.M.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested that will not get the Council far, an extension should be for an hour.
Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested continuing to outline decision package changes until 10:15
p.m. and following committee meetings next week, have a meeting to discuss the budget. If the Council has
not heard everyone's decision packages or changes to the budget by tonight, it will be difficult to discuss
them in future.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of order, that Council President Fraley-Monillas' comments were not
related to the motion. Mayor Nelson allowed Council President Fraley-Monillas to finish briefly.
Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested a two-hour hour block on the Council agenda next week after
committee meetings to work on the budget.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she still has people contacting her and she will not be able to have all her
decision packages in tonight. She agreed all the decision packages needed to be submitted before the
Council began voting. If the intent was to submit all the decision packages tonight, the meeting would be
much longer than 10:15 p.m. She is helping a lot citizens get through the Q&A process. She suggested
Councilmembers ask questions tonight and block out time at next week's meeting.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Nelson suggested the Council continue introducing amendments.
Councilmember Paine provided her second amendment: Fund the PROS Plan update to allow the City to
be eligible for RCO grants for the purpose of the Park & Recreation programs and land acquisition projects.
The cost is $120,000 for the next year and would be funded from ending fund balance.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested having the amendments on the screen like has been done in the past
so citizens can see them. With regard to the police body cam project, she asked why there were no funds in
the budget for the project. Acting Chief Lawless said an agreement has been worked out with vendor for a
pilot project to secure equipment and software and evaluate during the testing process. The City of Everett's
pilot project took about six months to determine what level of equipment needed to be issued to officers
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 20
and just as important, the staff time required to adhere to storage requirements and redaction issues. Not
knowing exactly what will be involved in the pilot project, an amount cannot be determined. The vendor,
whom the City uses for other services, is working with staff to evaluate the need in order to provide an
appropriate request.
Mayor Nelson asked if the City was being charged by the vendor. Chief Lawless answered not for the body -
worn camera project; they are utilized for other equipment within the department that can integrate with the
body cameras.
Councilmember Olson asked if she made a proposal about vehicle replacement DP #45 last week. Mayor
Nelson advised she had.
If the Council plans to set aside two hours at the next meeting to identify all the decision packages,
Councilmember K. Johnson said they need to be in a spreadsheet or some format this week in order to
include them in the Council packet. She asked when they needed to be submitted and who did they need to
be submitted to. Mr. Turley answered he planned to relisten to the Council meetings and put everything
that sounded like a proposal in a summary that would be included in the packet for next week, making it
easy to review each proposal.
Councilmember K. Johnson said Mr. Turley had not heard any of her proposals and asked how she should
provide them to him. Mr. Turley suggested that was being done tonight. Councilmember K. Johnson noted
there was only eight minutes remaining for Councilmembers to introduce their amendments. Council
President Fraley-Monillas suggested emailing them. Mr. Turley requested Councilmember email
amendments to him by tomorrow afternoon.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she will not be able to get all her information to Mr. Turley by tomorrow.
She just got her questions answered and is still getting discussion topics from citizens. Mr. Turley said to
be included in the packet, amendments need to be submitted to him by Thursday morning at the very latest.
Anything sent to him after that can be added to the summary for the Council meeting next Tuesday, but it
will not be in the Council packet. Mayor Nelson summarized if Councilmembers wanted their proposals
included in the packet, the cutoff was Thursday morning; after Thursday, the proposals could be included
in the summary Tuesday night but would not be in the agenda packet. Councilmember Buckshnis observed
Councilmembers were to provide the decision packages and rational and copy Councilmembers and the
Mayor if they were unable to submit them to Mr. Turley by Thursday morning.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she would not be able to get all her information to Mr. Turley by tomorrow,
but could provide it in time for the Council meeting and will copy all Councilmembers and Mr. Turley.
Councilmember Olson referred to the essential point made by Mr. Tibbott at last week's meeting as well as
today about deferred facilities maintenance. She suggested Councilmembers look at the amounts identified
for the human services department; besides the $25,000 she suggested be moved to the senior center, the
amount set aside for the new department including the half-time existing program manager is still
approximately $500,000. She wondered whether in such a tight budget year and without having a full plan,
funding a full-time social worker plus the program manager at approximately $150,000 and increasing that
by $100,0004200,00 totaling $250,000-$350,000 would be sufficient. Budgeting $500,000 seems like a
very large amount as a portion of the total budget. She asked Councilmembers to think about that during
the coming week.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked the Council to look at the original notes about building
maintenance estimates. She attended that meeting and heard exactly what the company who did the facilities
assessment said. She recalled very little work needed to be done soon; the assessment included a plan for
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 21
the next 10-15 years. She suggested looking at the report prepared by that outside consultant before
speaking about the urgency of building maintenance as there were some misnomers quoted about building
maintenance.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
EXTEND TO 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Olson asked where to find that report and what it was called. Council President Fraley-
Monillas suggested asking Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams offered to email the report to Council.
For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Williams advised the report was prepared by McKinstry. He offered
to provide a summary as well as the report. Councilmember Buckshnis said a citizen had provided her that
report.
Mayor Nelson summarized there will be two-hour agenda item next week. Councilmembers can submit
amendments to Mr. Turley by Thursday morning for inclusion in the packet; otherwise they will be
summarized at the Council meeting. He urged Councilmembers not to submit amendments Tuesday at 5
p.m.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson said due to the significant responsibilities of the Police Chief position, due diligence is being
conducted. He hoped to announce his appointment later this week.
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Buckshnis hoped everyone had great Thanksgiving and she looked forward to next year.
Councilmember K. Johnson assured all the businesses in the City that the Council supports them and will
do their very best to work with them. She has been a member of the Chamber of Commerce since 2011 and
joined because she does not have a business background and wanted to keep in touch with the businesses.
She supports the businesses and pledged to work with them and the Mayor to do whatever possible to make
them successful.
Councilmember Olson said her message was similar to Councilmember K. Johnson's, the proposal brought
to the forefront how important it is that the Council do what it can to support business owners as well as
the City's economic base which are very intertwined. She is not very far removed from business, her own
business and her affiliation with her husband's brick and mortar in the past. [The first part of this comment
was inaudible] staff and Mayor to be able to do what they want without involving Council is for sure a fact,
but it doesn't have to be faster and it definitely is not better. The job of the executive is to follow and enforce
the laws and she personally felt it was reckless for the Council to hand over their role to make, alter and
suspend City law that this and past Councils have put in place. There is important and valuable judgment
and oversight from the body of the Council and having those applied to the waivers that arise as a system
of checks and balances on the executive branch is good business for a government. She assured it was not
at all personal and had nothing to do with this Mayor, it was about good government. The Council is willing
and able to do their part to move things forward on an emergency basis, knowing that time is money and
sometimes a day or two can make a difference.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said good government moves to help out citizens and businesses and the
people connected to the City. She referred to a letter in the papers by Councilmember K. Johnson that
definitely took some difficult swings at the Mayor and her because they believed they were standing forward
for the citizens of Edmonds. She thought there had been some acknowledgement that going to the papers
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 22
was not a good way to communicate with each other. She found it perhaps immature in nature and expressed
concern with the statement that the Council could stop what they were doing and meet. Council President
Fraley-Monillas said there are problems with doing that when a Councilmember can only meet two day a
week and the last time an emergency meeting was scheduled on the second day of the week, they did not
show up. She was disturbed that a Councilmember used the media to undermine her and others. She did not
think that was where the Council wanted to go with its interactions but said perhaps she was in error.
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the many citizens who have reach out with their concerns. Over the
past week there have been a lot of them and it takes time to respond to emails but she greatly appreciated
them. She expressed her deep appreciation to the small business owners who took the time to share their
struggles and needs with her. She reiterated her ongoing commitment to meet and act with expedience to
help assist the small business community, specifically brick and mortar businesses who are bearing the
brunt of the financial fallout from the ongoing crisis. She urged the public to stay home if they can, social
distance and please wear a mask.
Councilmember Distelhorst announced The Washington State Department of Health launched WA Notify
yesterday. The public can enroll in the tracking system and turn on notification if they have had a potential
exposure. It is quick to do, takes approximately 30 seconds. Like Councilmember L. Johnson said, please
stay home. When the county was in full lockdown in March, the peak was 129 cases/100,000 residents in
Snohomish County. The current rate is 368/100,000 residents, almost 3 times the rate when in full
lockdown. Everyone needs to stay home; get takeout and support local businesses but go home and not
hang out without a mask because that is not safe and your neighbors, businesses and the City will suffer.
Two weeks ago there were about 180 active cases in Edmonds; there are now about 400, more than double
in 2 weeks. He urged everyone to take this seriously because the higher the numbers go, the more
restrictions will be put on busines and on cities and the more everyone will suffer.
Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation to the multitude of people who have taken time out of their
day to write to the Council, noting the information is coming in hot and fast. With regard to the
neighborhood on 2" d Avenue with the odor issue; she heard about it a couple months ago and made some
inquiries. She hoped to find a way to resolve that issue in the coming year, noting an odor issue is
inescapable particularly when staying at home. Being outside provides an opportunity to air out your
thoughts and check on your mood. When going outside it is important to stay physically distanced from
neighbors and always wearing a mask even outside. She installed WA Notify on her phone; that is important
but it is after the fact. She suggested the City look at options for residents to go outside and walk around, it
is mood lifter and something physical that people can do. She agreed with other Councilmembers, stay
home, and if going out, get takeout and go home.
Student Representative Roberts hoped everyone had a safe and enjoyable Thanksgiving. The Youth
Commission has an opening; he urged youth to apply or for adults to encourage an interested student to
apply. As the holiday season continues, it is crucial to wear masks, socially distance ourselves and stay
home if possible, and download the WA Notify app. Moving into 2021 does not mean the virus will
somehow disappear. He has seen too many people in person and over social media blatantly ignoring the
guidelines set forth by the governor and the CDC which is the reason for the third wave. He encouraged the
public to make wise choices and to be aware how their individual actions affect the most vulnerable
population of the City and struggling businesses.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 23
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 24
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
MI C HAEL NELSON, MAYOR
PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
t'mgc 24
:.�;
�; .:
rr
:;:
Public Comment for 12/1/20 Council Meeting:
From: stephen hearn
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 5:27 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 1140 3rd Avenue South - sewer order problem
Good evening Edmonds City Council,
My name is Stephen Hearn and I reside at 1140 3rd Avenue South in Edmonds. I know Ralph
Adams and several other of my neighbors will be speaking tonight about the sewer odor
problem in our area. I've attached several years worth of communication I've had with the city
to try and resolve this manner. Sewer plugs, cleaning wet wells, changing pumping schedules,
taking reading have NOT made a difference.
Unfortunately, there's never be a long term, sustainable solution. In fact, the sewer smell is
becoming even worse and is now consistently present when we are in our yard. So much so
that we have to go inside, shut our doors and windows to keep the smell out. This is not only
having a detrimental impact on our quality of life, but we are getting concerned it may have
potential health/economic impacts for our family.
I'm confident there is a long term solution to this very real issue and I'm asking the council to
act quickly on their citizens behalf.
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 5:17 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>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>
Subject: Public Comments for Public Hearing on Ordinance 4201
The motion made and seconded related to what became Ordinance 4201 failed 4-2. Please
make full disclosure to the public that Ordinance 4201 was not properly adopted.
When the vote on the emergency declaration related to Ordinance 4201 failed 4-2, a new
motion could have been made to pass the Moratorium just as a regular Ordinance. That didn't
happen.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 25
City Council may want to start over and see if somebody wants to make a motion that does not
declare an emergency. The meeting minutes clearly indicate that all thought that an emergency
ordinance had just been passed. Nobody pointed out that 5 votes were required.
Also - Ordinance 4201 contains an incorrect RCW reference related to referendums. If Council
tries again, please correct in any future ordinances adopted.
In general, it would also be best if our emergency Ordinances indicated in the first 2-3 words of
the Ordinance Title whether an ordinance is an Emergency Ordinance or not. Some Emergency
Ordinances do, others don't, which makes it very hard to search our Ordinance table for
emergency Ordinances. Thank you.
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 5:14 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>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>
Subject: Public Comments for Public Hearing on Ordinance 4200
The motion made and seconded related to what became Ordinance 4200 failed 4-3. Please
make full disclosure to the public that Ordinance 4200 was not properly adopted.
When the vote on the emergency declaration related to Ordinance 4200 failed 4-3, a new
motion could have been made to pass the Moratorium just as a regular Ordinance. That didn't
happen.
City Council may want to start over and see if somebody wants to make a motion that does not
declare an emergency.
Also - Ordinance 4200 contains an incorrect RCW reference related to referendums. If Council
tries again, please correct in any future ordinances adopted.
In general, it would also be best if our emergency Ordinances indicated in the first 2-3 words of
the Ordinance Title whether an ordinance is an Emergency Ordinance or not. Some Emergency
Ordinances do, others don't, which makes it very hard to search our Ordinance table for
emergency Ordinances. Thank you.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 26
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 5:00 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,
Kernen <Kernen. Lien@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for December 1, 2020 City Council meeting
Please budget funds to return funds to Westgate Chapel related to the following:
History shows that City of Edmonds government chose to act contrary to the
City's Street Vacation laws
and charge Westgate Chapel $92,610 PLUS make Westgate Chapel grant multiple easements to
3rd parties. City Staff and the City Attorney subsequently initiated a legislative effort to change
our street vacation laws, a legislative effort that I believe needs to be investigated.
City of Edmonds government chose to
charge Westgate Chapel $92,610 PLUS made Westgate Chapel grant multiple easements to 3rd
parties even after I stated the following during the November 1, 2016 Public Hearing:
1. "Why should an applicant have to pay for and provide an appraisal with the
application BEFORE the City Council has even discussed granting the petition
and/or whether or not to require compensation? Perhaps the applicant should
be REIMBURSED for this expense."
2. "1 strongly support NOT charging the applicant $92,610 related to this street vacation. I think
it would be WRONG to do so."
3. "Why charge the property owner now when staff has FOUND that the vacation of those
same easement rights is in the PUBLIC INTEREST?"
4. "Please treat this applicant fairly. The vacation is already in the PUBLIC INTEREST and that
should be PLENTY without the need for $92,610 more."
5. "Conditions include the provision of easements to Olympic View Water and Sewer District as
well as to other vague, unidentified entities. I'M NOT SURE WHY WE ARE DOING IT THIS WAY
instead of just simply following State law by the City itself RETAINING 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?"
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 27
Regarding item 1 above, my request that the applicant be reimbursed for the appraisal expense
was reasonable considering Ordinance No. 3647. Ordinance No. 3647 deducted the cost of the
related appraisal ($3,750) from the compensation required. Why
was Westgate Chapel treated differently?
The approved November 1, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes show that not one
citizen showed up to the Public Hearing to ask City Council to charge a penny of compensation
for this street vacation, let alone the full tilt price of $92,610. Furthermore, not one
citizen showed up to support requiring Westgate Chapel to grant easements to third parties.
As such, why did City Council
charge Westgate Chapel $92,610 PLUS make Westgate Chapel grant multiple easements to
3rd parties? ECDC 20.70.140.A.3. clearly says that it is Either:OR.
Edmonds City Government had no legal right to require BOTH —the law is clearly Either:OR.
Making all of this even worse, efforts have been made from outside the legislative branch of
our City Government to remove the Either:OR law from our Code. The Either:OR law reflects
the legislative intent of the elected officials who adopted it. The people from outside
the legislative branch of our City Government tried this even though Planning Board
recommended keeping the Either:OR law.
Contrary to the Planning Board's recommendation and previously adopted POLICY, City Staff
recommended an amendment to City Code allowing City Council to require BOTH monetary
compensation AND the retention of easements (i.e. utility easements) as conditions to
a Street Vacation. The current City Code allows Either compensation: OR the retention of
easements.
City Staff and the City Attorney are NOT our Policy Makers. As such, why did they recommend
action different than what Policy Makers previously adopted and different than what the
Planning Board recommended?
Please review the following comments made by City Attorney Jeff Taraday during the August
14, 2019 Planning Board Meeting. His comments relate to another proposed amendment,
doubling of compensation in certain situations, but I think the comments provide a window
into one view of the fundamental purpose of local government:
Taraday - 1:23:10 mark of Planning Board Meeting: "I represent the City of Edmonds. I'm here
to advance the interest of the City of Edmonds, not individual property owners."
Taraday - 1:23:18 mark of Planning Board Meeting: "So, if I see that State Law allows the City of
Edmonds to collect more money for a street vacation than it is currently collecting, it is my job
as the City Attorney to make that option available to the Policy Makers and let them decide
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 28
whether they want to adopt that into their Code or not .... but we
are leaving money on the table right now...that is the bottom line. Now, Policy Makers may
decide that it is good to leave money on the table — that's a policy decision — but I'm telling you
we are leaving money on the table. So, I feel an obligation to bring that forward and let the
Policy Makers make a decision about whether that is a good thing or not."
PLEASE NOTE: Policy Makers already decided long ago what were good things. State Law has
not changed, yet the City Attorney and City Staff recommended changes. Again, please
appreciate, we do not elect the City Attorney or City Staff to make Policy.
Just think of the good Westgate Chapel could have done with their $92,610 plus all
the money they had to spend preparing the multiple 3rd Party easements required by City of
Edmonds Government, etc.
Westgate Chapel Emergency Services is wholly funded by donations of
the Westgate Chapel family and the greater Edmonds, Washington community and is a member
of the Snohomish County Food Bank Coalition which is made up of twenty food banks in our
county. Westgate Chapel Emergency Services is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
Each week Westgate Chapel Emergency Services operates a food and clothing bank for the less
fortunate in the greater Edmonds community. The food Westgate Chapel Emergency Services
distributes is donated by Northwest Harvest, Food Lifeline and the United States Federal
Commodities Program. In addition, food, clothing and household items are donated by
the Westgate Chapel congregation and the greater Edmonds
community. Westgate Chapel Emergency Services also purchases food when donations are not
enough. In addition to food and clothing, Westgate Chapel Emergency Services also provides
some financial assistance, gasoline and community transit vouchers for appointments or job
searches and/or grocery vouchers for specialized needs.
I find it disingenuous that Edmonds City Government would profess care for the elderly, infirm
and lower -income residents and households after what the City Government did
to Westgate Chapel. Westgate Chapel has been aiding those less fortunate for
decades. Westgate Chapel did not need to create a NEW "Community and Economic Relief
Fund". Westgate Chapel had its first worship service on June 7, 1959 and has been providing
relief in our community for decades! Thank you.
From: Bill Phipps
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 3:24 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Citizens Planning Board
<citizens-planning@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen. Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Feser,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 29
Angie <Angie.Feser@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Moratorium on Subdivision Applications
Greetings Edmonds City Council!
I'm submitting a public comment on the moratorium on subdivision applications.
I know I am speaking for thousands of Edmonds residents when I say: I wish there was a
permanent ban on subdivision applications.
Isn't the City nearly built out already? Someone said we are 95% built out, is that correct? Isn't
that enough? When is enough enough?
Once our last remaining open spaces and pocket forests are gone, they are gone for good. We
need those open spaces more than we need more subdivisions.
I propose the City acquire all remaining undeveloped lots/parcels in the City and turn them into
public parks. Now that would be in the "public interest" !
If you insist on developing every last square foot of undeveloped land in Edmonds, we at least
need a strong and meaningful Tree Code. As the draft Tree Code is currently written, only 30%
of trees on undeveloped lots would be saved. It doesn't take into account the 70% of trees that
will be lost on these parcels. It also doesn't take into account the trees on already developed
lots, Shouldn't the trees on developed lots get some protections as well ?
Please see my e-mail that I sent to you (cc'd) on October 14, 2020 for more on the Tree Code.
If we are going to "maintain or enhance" our forest canopy, as stated in the Urban Forest
Management Plan, we are going to need a stronger Tree Code. It's simple math. If we allow 70
% of the trees to be cut on new subdivisions and we continue to let property owners cut as
many trees as they want on developed lots, how are we ever going to "maintain or enhance"
our urban forest canopy?
The math just doesn't add up.
We need to think along the lines of tree replacement. We recognize housing pressures and
property rights. But we still need to replace all those trees that we are losing.
In my neighborhood, we just lost 6 large conifer trees on two different properties in the last
two weeks. Even with a strong Tree Code those losses would be permissible. Neither of those
folks are replanting conifer trees.
The City should require tree plantings for every tree lost to development or property
rights. We should truly show a commitment to our urban forest by instituting a massive tree
planting program.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 30
Our mantra should be: New trees planted for every tree lost . For any reason, any place, at any
time; new trees should be planted for every tree lost.
Thank you for your time;
Bill Phipps
Edmonds resident
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 3:06 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public hearing on Ordinance #4201 Establishing a Moratorium on subdivision
applications
Council,
I support this moratorium for reasons too numerous to list, and not enough time to list them.
Suffice to say that this is an important moratorium and I fully support it. I would have preferred
a 6 month moratorium, but 4 months will have to do.
Regards,
Joan Bloom
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 2:57 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public hearing CFP/CIP
Council,
I agree completely with Save Our Marsh. Please consider the following changes in the CFP/CIP:
(1) DELETE the "Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration Related Projects" from the 2021-2026
CFP/CIP.
(2) Remove the Edmonds Marsh from a "Storm Water" heading, and place it instead in "Parks"
or a new "Habitat Restoration" heading.
(3) Consider adding a new project "Stormwater retrofits and pollution abatement for Edmonds
Marsh conservation".
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 31
All of these changes are necessary for the future restoration of the Marsh. These changes will
also ensure that restoration will be as cost effective as possible for the taxpayers of Edmonds.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Joan Bloom
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 2:40 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: "Emergency Ordinance Providing Mayor Temporary Authority to use tools to address
Economic Emergency"
Council,
The title of this agenda item should be "Emergency Ordinance Providing Mayor Temporary
Authority to SUSPEND CODE to address Economic Emergency", as the ordinance does not
simply allow the office of the Mayor to "use tools." Please do not grant emergency authority to
the Mayor to suspend code, titles 8 (Traffic), Title 17 (General Zoning), Title 18 (Public Works
Requirements), Title 19 (Building Codes), Title 20 (Review Criteria and Procedures).
I agree with Councilmember Kristiana Johnson's 11-30-2020 letter to MyEdmondsNews. Council
is the legislative body and can be consulted quickly when needed. The executive branch, ie:
office of the Mayor, is responsible for enforcing code, and should not be given the authority to
suspend code, even on a temporary basis.
I also agree with Gerald Bernstein, MD, in his 11-30-2020 letter to MyEdmondsNews. Dr.
Bernstein said:
"We have a system of checks and balances for a reason; that reason is we do not want one
person to be in complete control of our government. The city council should unanimously and
unequivocally refuse to abdicate their authority to the mayor for any period of time."
Regards,
Joan Bloom
From: Save Our Marsh
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 12:37 PM
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 32
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
< pub Iiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Hearing on CFP/CIP
Attached is a Save Our Marsh letter regarding the City Council's "Public Hearing on the Proposed 2021-
2026 Capital Improvements Program/Capital Facilities Plan" tonight (12/01/2020).
From: edmondskar
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 7:17 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Comments for tonight's City Council meeting
I would like to submit a comment for tonight's City Council Meeting, which is to express my
opposition to the Mayor's request for emergency powers. The citizens of Edmonds have
elected a city council to represent them, and those council members should be engaged in any
decisions made on behalf of the City. While the Mayor has concerns about having to make
immediate decisions during the pandemic, I do not believe that a pandemic that has been on
going for over 9 months will at this stage create a situation in which an emergency decision
must be made. Looking forward there are many decisions that will be before our City during
the continuation of the pandemic - our CoVid case numbers continue to rise which will mean
possible decisions about implementing further closures or restrictions, and hopefully with a
vaccine on the way, its distribution may involve the City as well. But these are all scenarios
which should be thought out and planned for well in advance, not as an "emergency" and will
generally be decided at a State level or by other agencies. Further, given our current ease of
communications with Zoom, cell phones, social distancing protocols already in place, it seems
hard to imagine that given a true emergency situation, that the Council could not meet in some
virtual form. Let's keep democracy alive and well in Edmonds. And let's not set a precedent
for future mayoral inappropriate seizures of power.
Making my comments heard at the City Council meeting allows me to participate in our City
government's democratic process. The City Council should fully participate also and be
involved in all decisions.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 33
And thank you to everyone working on behalf of the City of Edmonds, to keep the City
running during this difficult time
Kathleen Ryan
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 1:45 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Doherty, Patrick
<Patrick. Doherty@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 2021 Budget: $500,000 for Human Services Program
Council,
Here are my comments for your budget discussion on Tuesday, December 1, 2020. 1 have also
submitted these comments to Myedmondsnews and to the Edmonds Beacon.
Spend where it's most needed
In 2020, the City of Edmonds Human Services Program was created, under Patrick Doherty,
Director of Community Services. A program manager and program coordinator were hired.
Mayor Nelson has included in his 2021 budget an additional $500,000 for this program.
There is no indication how the funds are to be spent, so in public comments to Council on
November 17 and November 23, 1 asked how the half -million would be used. None of my
questions have been answered.
Two of these questions are
a How will the Human Services Department identify Edmonds residents who are most at
risk? What is your outreach plan?
• Given the pandemic, and limited in -person contact, how will identified residents be
served?
In my 45 years, in three states, practicing as a social worker, I have learned the following: social
services are usually underfunded; ambitious outreach programs often fail because of lack of
teamwork within each agency; it is difficult to identify those at risk.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 34
The Human Services Program will not be able to meet the need for social services in Edmonds.
The likely scenario is the program will continue to refer to Snohomish County agencies that are
better equipped to address needs.
If the City of Edmonds has an extra $500,000, why not use it for those at risk of going hungry?
As the pandemic continues, Council could allocate funds towards non-profit agencies that focus
on hunger, such as the Edmonds Food Bank, EastWest Food Rescue, and the Nourishing
Network.
Throwing money at problems never works, especially when a poorly planned program is doing
the throwing. Those in need should be served, but by County agencies that are better
equipped, and will do a better job.
I implore Council, don't waste $500,000 of taxpayer money by expanding the Human Services
Program. Instead, feed the hungry.
Regards,
Joan Bloom
From: Julie Stuller
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 9:58 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Restaurants and sidewalks
Dear City Council,
As I was walking with my elderly father up Dayton Street, between 5th and 6th, on November
29 in the afternoon, Salish Sea Brewing (which I dearly love) was packed. Yes, the patrons were
outside, on both sides of the sidewalk, maskless obviously, drinking and eating with waiters
running back and forth, but the six feet apart rule was not in effect. It was a party atmosphere,
which in normal times would be great, but it was very depressing. I moved my dad off the
sidewalk and we proceeded up the middle of the road until we were well past. That was a
dangerous situation obviously (traffic stopped in both lanes for us) another elderly person may
not have been able to maneuver unaccompanied and would have had to walk through the
crowded sidewalk. As we all know, if we're reading the paper or listening to the news, this is
very dangerous for our elderly, let alone anyone young or aged with immune compromised
systems.
I do have complete sympathy for business owners at this time, so I'm asking you to please help
business owners understand the rules we have and why they need to be enforced so we
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 35
hopefully won't be in complete shutdown and my father and neighbors will be alive for
Christmas.
Thank you,
Julie Stuller
From: Sally Barringer
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2020 11:28 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Hearing on Ordinance #4200 Public Hearing on Ordinance #4201
Hello Council Members,
I encourage the council approve a 4 month moratorium that will effectively delay any action on
any new subdivision applications until the completion of the update of the city's Tree Code.
It is important the city council approves the moratorium to allow sufficient time to work
through the tree code update before the Seaview Woods development is submitted so it will
conform to the new tree code.
Since I have large trees above and close to the city's proposed 184th street I am very concerned
they will be further damaged.
In the past the proposed 184th street was bulldozed up to the toe of my 20 to 30 foot bank and
this has caused the bank to slide and is undercut.
Sally Barringer
Edmonds, WA 98026
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 1, 2020
Page 36