Cmd121020EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE SPECIAL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
December 10, 2020
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brook Roberts, Student Representative
1. 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.
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir.
Dave Turley, Finance Director
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
The Edmonds City Council virtual online special meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson.
The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Buckshnis 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
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 1
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments
Maurina [last name not given], said she believed Chief Pruitt had been appointed as Police Chief with the
best of intentions, but with all -the -unclear -reasoning and missing -findings from the task force, the people of
the City would like help believing in that choice. Due to the lack of information and the new findings
regarding Chief Pruitt, citizens want to know exactly why so they can support his selection and so that there
is no question that he was hired only on the color of his skin like some people are saying. She asked the
Council to move to reconsider and take into consideration all the new findings and give it back to the people
so they can believe with the Council.
Rebecca Anderson, Edmonds, said she listened to the Council meeting earlier this week when Mayor
Nelson's nominee for Chief of Police was discussed and voted on. She listened to the comments from
citizens who were puzzled by the Mayor's decision to replace his initial candidate for Chief of Police with
a candidate that did not have the same level of experience or education as the man he so strongly supported
in April 2020. It was her understanding that a copy of public documents containing very serious information
about Mr. Pruitt's conduct were provided to Council shortly before Tuesday's meeting which is perhaps
why Councilmember Olson attempted to raise the issue at the meeting but was promptly shut down by the
HR Director and Council President. Councilmember Buckshnis then requested to request this new, serious
information in an executive session but her motion was voted down 3-4. Because the Chief of Police is such
as an important position in the community and will serve all of Edmonds, as Councilmembers and the
Mayor are elected to do, if new information was provided, she did not understand why more time was not
allotted to discern it. She found this process rushed and extremely concerning. It was her understanding a
person who voted in favor of the motion could make a motion to reconsider. She strongly encouraged the
Council to go back and do their due diligence based on the recent information about Mr. Pruitt that speaks
to his character and temperament and get ahead of it before it is exposed by the media. Edmonds citizens
deserve a transparent process in all that the Council and Mayor do.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. BUDGET DELIBERATIONS AND OPPORTUNITY FOR BUDGET ADOPTION
Finance Director Dave Turley described the ground rules for tonight's discussion: He will share his screen
with the list of proposals, proposals will be considered one at a time, he will introduce the topic, and then
the Councilmember who proposed it will have an opportunity to explain their rationale. Because
Councilmember K. Johnson is off screen, she asked him to read her proposed amendments. After
discussion, he suggested Councilmembers vote on each proposal individually. As some Council proposed
amendments are similar but not exactly the same, he suggested they be discussed together to avoid
approving one and then considering another that may contradict it. Once the similar proposals are discussed,
it will be up to the Council to decide how to act; however, votes will still be taken on each proposal, not as
a group. If the Council completed the review of the proposed amendments tonight, a motion would be in
order to approve the ordinance as presented and with the amendments made tonight and then the ordinance
would be on Consent for December 15"' because it needs to be passed at the same meeting as the CFP. City
Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if a main motion needed to be made before the Council begin discussing
decision packages. Mr. Taraday said a Roberts Rules purest would probably say yes, but the Council has
not always insisted on that in the past. The intent of the motions is to amend the proposed budget and the
adopted amendments can be incorporated into the final budget. If a Coumcilmember wanted to move the
Mayor's proposed budget to get started and then Councilmembers make amendments, that would be
technically proper.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 2
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Turley for sending out Councilmembers' emails and their rationale
for decision packages. She asked if the intent was for each Councilmember to read their decision packages
and asked how duplicate amendments would be handled. Mr. Turley said for the ones that are duplicates,
he will give a brief explanation and a Councilmember could then describe it at length or proceed with only
his introduction.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said the way it was usually done, if there was a second motion that was
the same as the first motion, the second motion was asked to withdraw. She assumed that was
Councilmember Buckshnis' question.
Councilmember Buckshnis said that was not her question. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented
there appeared to be some duplicate amendments, typically if one passed, the other was asked to withdraw.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding of Mr. Turley's proposed process, for each decision
package, Councilmembers should make a motion even if there were duplicates or should the Council
discuss the topic and then snake a motion after the duplicates are discussed. Mr. Turley provided an
example: Councilmember Buckshnis proposed to leave money in Fund 016 for future use in building
maintenance which would be to not approve a proposed decision package, Councilmember Olson wants to
increase funding by $200,000, and Councilmember K. Johnson wants to increase funding for building
maintenance by $1M. His plan was to introduce all three, the Council can then discuss them, and hopefully
during discussion it will become apparent where Councilmembers are leaning. For example, if it appeared
Councilmembers thought $1M was too much, he would not expect a motion.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding that Council would discuss the decision packages
and then make motions. For example, she did not understand why there was a Fund 016 and did not care
whether it was saved or not, she just needed an explanation. Mr. Turley said he was trying to avoid the
Council approving motions that later contradicted a similar proposal.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS, TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY
OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2021.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if it would be more appropriate to adopt budget and then make
amendments. Mr. Taraday explained there is a pending motion on the floor to adopt the budget and he
expected there would be a series of amendments to the main motion. Once the main motion is fully amended
by Council, the Council can vote on the amended main motion.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked why a motion would be made to approve the budget and not vote
on it; she felt it did not make sense to make a motion at this point, make amendments and then vote on the
main motion. She suggested it made more sense to amend the budget and then vote at the end and she did
not think it had ever been done that way. Mr. Taraday said, as he mentioned earlier, he was not sure it had
been done that way in the past but the question was asked whether that would be in order and technically
correct and it actually was more proper to do it that way, but frankly he did not think it mattered very much.
For those trying to follow Roberts Rules as closely as possible, this is the proper procedure.
Mr. Turley explained the budget is prepared in July/August so as part of the amendment process, staff
usually proposes amendments related to things discovered after the budget was proposed. These
amendments need to be approved by Council and he was hopeful they could be approved all at once.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, suggesting the Council decide whether to vote on the
motion before making amendments. City Clerk Scott Passey explained that according to parliamentary
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 3
procedure, there needs to be a motion on the table before amendments can be made. Tile motion on the
table is a motion to adopt the 2021 proposed budget; this is the long amendment process where amendments
are reviewed and discussed one at a time and then at the end, the Council will adopt the budget.
Mr. Turley reviewed the proposed Changes to the Preliminary Budget — Proposed by Staff.
Proposed Changes to the Preliminary Budget — Proposed by Staff
#
DP#
'Submitte
Fund
Description
Expense
Revenue
Net Effect
Or New
r
Increase
Increase
on Cash
(Decrease
(Decrease)
l
28
'Purley
General Fund
Typo on DP 28 - $6,082 charged to wrong BAR
$--
$-
$-
account, no effect on revenues or expenses
2
11)P 9
(Lawless
General Fund
'Estimated Increase to Prisoner Care Costs
$300,00
$
$(300,000
3
Purley
General Fund
Reduce Fire Hydrant Maintenance Costs - additional
$(50,000)
50,00
information received after budget was created
4
5
Turley
General Fund
"Unfreeze" one frozen position - one position had been
$70,437
$
$(70,437
filled but had not yet been entered into the payroll
system when the list of frozen positions was created, s
it incorrectly appeared to be a vacant position
:5
New
Turley
Sewer Fund
Adj. new incinerator bond payments from estimate t
$(187,370)
$
$187,37
actual
5
:New
Neill-
IFund 617
Adj. to Firemen's Pension Fund for recent rate increases
$8,583
$(8,583
Plo son
Tota]
$141,65
$(141,650
7
New
lDoherty
Fund 140
BID Budget —Approved by Council
1 $79,201
$76,34
$(2,862
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY STAFF.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked about the frozen position that had been filled. Mr. Turley answered it
was a custodial position.
Councilmember Olson referred to DP #3, commenting this was one of the items in 2020 for the Mayor's
emergency relief fund so this is the second year in row $50,000 would be removed. She asked about the
fire hydrant maintenance program, whether the Fire Department was doing it now and the City did not need
to do that maintenance or was more budgeted than was needed. Mr. Turley explained in the past the City
maintained all the fire hydrants in the City and there was a budget of about $200,000. It was his
understanding the City was no longer allowed to maintain its own fire hydrants. When this was originally
budgeted, he reduced the amount by $150,000, but after learning the City was not allowed to maintain
hydrants at all, he proposed removing the remaining $50,000.
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained an attorney brought a case on behalf of a ratepayer who
said fire hydrant maintenance should be general governmental as it is intended to prevent fires and is not a
function of the utility. That case was successful and so the City could no longer provide hydrant
maintenance out of the Utility Fund, it needed to be paid from the General Fund so the utilities billed the
General Fund and rates were adjusted to reflect that. Several years later the legislature passed a bill making
it legal for the Water Utility to provide hydrant maintenance. The only funds the Utility receives from the
General Fund for hydrants is when a new one is installed, but the maintenance has gone away.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order regarding DP #7 that is below the total above. Mr. Turley
explained the Council approved that when the BID made their presentation. He added it to the Staff
Proposed Changes for clarity and to ensure the amendments were complete.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 4
Mr. Turley began his review of the Proposed Changes to the Preliminary Budget— Prnnn�8ri by C onnr.iI-
DP
Expense
Revenue
No.
# or
Submitter
Fund
Descriptions
Increase
Increase
New
Decrease
Decrease
General
Increase Equity Initiative funding from $50,000 to
1
1
L. Johnson
Fund
$75,000
$25,000
Councilmember L. Johnson said the budget in DP # 1 states the amount requested is the minimal amount
estimated to begin such work. There has been a great need for this work locally and across the nation. After
talking to HR Director Neill Hoyson, she concluded an additional $25,000 would allow the City to do more
than the bare minimum so she proposed adding $25,000 for a total of $75,000.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO INCREASE EQUITY INITIATIVE FUNDING FROM $50,000 TO $75,000 BY
ADDING $25,000.
Councilmember Olson said she was interested in the context and had made this inquiry a couple times. She
felt $50,000 was a good start for a lean year. She asked what product would be represented by this work. If
she did not know what the City got for $50,000, she could not support an increase. She 100% supported the
baseline of $50,000 proposed by Mayor Nelson. Councilmember L. Johnson said she has stated the reasons.
She agreed this was a lean year, but this work was pressing and important enough that the City needed to
do more than just the basics. This work affects the bottom line, it makes Edmonds a city that is an equitable
workplace and helps avoid lawsuits form inequitable situations. She believed it was warranted and the fact
that 2021 was a lean year did not deter her from a desire to increase the amount. What the program would
provide and what the additional amount could do would be for Ms. Neill Hoyson or Mayor Nelson to
identify.
Mayor Nelson said Ms. Neill Hoyson was not present tonight. Councilmember L. Johnson said the budget
book states $50,000 will get us started so an additional $25,000 will allow more flexibility to implement
the type of training program the City wants and if additional things come up that would be beneficial, there
will be that ability. If those opportunities did not come up, the money did not need to be spent.
Councilmember K. Johnson expressed support for the proposed change, pointing out it was not just about
race and equity. There is a larger component related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The
City has done very little to evaluate ADA needs. The Diversity Commission is making small, incremental
steps but this discussion needs to include how to help people who are deaf that are stopped by police,
someone with a physical disability who is unable to climb the stairs at City Hall, etc. If the intent is to
prevent a lawsuit, the City is substandard when comes to ADA. Slie supported expanding the understanding
that it would be used for those purposes as well. The first step is to include the fiends in the budget, then
Ms. Neill Hoyson can be asked to provide the Council a proposal for review and comment.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed appreciation for Councilmember K. Johnson's comment, relaying
her definition of equity is across the board and would include what Councilmember K. Johnson said.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he was fully supportive and thanked Councilmember K. Johnson for
making an excellent point. He explained most of EDI training he has personally taken always includes those
items. That was great feedback from Council to the Administration on how they hoped the money would
be spent.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for the proposed change.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 5
Councilmember Olson commented the City was in a bit of a crunch with the budget this year, recognizing
that that likely happens to some extent every year, but when things are done that are super vague like this
and there is no substantiation of a plan for the program, it doesn't feel like the Council is being the best
stewards of the taxpayers' money. She suggested adding a requirement that staff come to Council with a
plan prior to spending the additional $25,000.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON,
THAT THE COUNCIL SEE A PLAN FOR SPENDING ABOVE THE $50,000 THRESHOLD PRIOR
TO PROCEEDING AND A REPORT OF HOW THE $50,000 WAS SPENT AND WHAT WOULD
BE DONE NEXT.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said the amendment was very vague and asked if the motion was to
approve up to $75,000, but at the $50,000 mark, the Council review how the funds have been spent but
there is still authorization to spend up to $75,000. Councilmember Olson answered yes, by showing the
plan and getting approval from the Council.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not want to micromanage the budget. She envisioned the reports
would go through a committee at some point, observing some COLlncllmembers have not experienced the
committee format. She was hopeful the Council would not micromanage the budget as she was not in favor
of that practice.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF
THE SECOND.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (7-0), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING YES.
1
Remove DP 11, leave money in Fund 016 for
2
11
Buckshnis
001 / 016
future use in Building Maintenance
$ 210,222
$(210,222)
General
3
35
Olson
Fund
Increase funding for Building Maintenance
$210,222
K
General
4
35
Johnson
Fund
Increase funding for Building Maintenance
$ 1,000,000
Mr. Turley explained item 2 by Councilmember Buckshnis would move $210,222 out of Fund 016 into the
General Fund where it would be used for building maintenance so the transfer would not occur, item 3 by
Councilmember Olson would increase funding for building maintenance by another $210,222 (currently
$500,000 so it would increase to $710,000) and item 4 by Councilmember K. Johnson was to increase
funding for building maintenance by $1M. Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: facility
condition assessment identified a $9M backlog in deferred maintenance, equipment and city facilities. We
must be diligent in allocating sufficient funds to reduce the backlog over time. This is not the time to reduce
facilities funding by $1 M in order to fund new programs.
Councilmember Buckshnis explained her proposal was a question as she did not know why Fund 016 was
established. If it was established to accumulate funds for building maintenance, it could be kept. She
recalled Fund 016 was established at the same time as Fund 017 for the marsh as well as 018. If funds were
removed from Fund 016, the funds should be eliminated via ordinance. Mr. Williams answered there used
to be two funds, one for general facilities maintenance, custodial work, changing light bulbs and other minor
projects. Fund 016 was a separate fund for capital dollars such as grants or other funds that would go toward
building capital projects. The idea of separating them was eliminated and it is now called capital renewal
funding in the regular budget which is where the larger amount for facilities capital has been budgeted. The
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 6
$210,222 was originally for facilities and it became orphaned in that fund and a decision needed to be made
where it should go.
Councilmember Buckshnis withdrew her proposal.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested getting rid of Fund 016. Mr. Turley said he will bring that up in
Finance Committee next year.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked the source of the funds that were orphaned in Fund 016, whether it was
from a grant. She questioned whether it should be swept into the General Fund, and suggested maybe it
should be swept into the new maintenance fund. Mr. Williams said it was left over many years of operating
that fund. All money was for facilities capital projects. When a previous finance director changed the fund
structure to put it all in the same fund, those monies were left.
Councilmember K. Johnson withdrew her proposal.
Councilmember K. Johnson changed her proposal to put the funds into maintenance and not add $1M but
not put the funds into the General Fund. Mr. Turley clarified Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal would
be to not move $210,222 from Fund 016 into the General Fund. Councilmember K. Johnson agreed her
proposal was to put it into the appropriate maintenance fund.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
MOVE $210,222 INTO THE APPROPRIATE MAINTENANCE FUND, NOT THE GENERAL
FUND.
Councilmember Olson said that was generally her proposal and rationale. She did not think money being
held in a special fund for building maintenance should go into the General Fund but should be used for
building maintenance in the coming year since the City has a backlog of $9M. She was okay with the
$500,000 that was proposed and adding the $210,222 for a total of $710,222. If the budget ended up being
healthy, she would support the Administration asking for more money later. It was her understanding that
that was Councilmember K. Johnson's motion.
Councilmember Distelhorst pointed out facilities maintenance is in the General Fund. Mr. Williams agreed,
it is a separate program within the General Fund. Councilmember Distelhorst asked if the motion was
essentially the same motion that is DP #11. Mayor Nelson clarified the motion is to increase building
maintenance by $210,222.
Councilmember K. Johnson appreciated the clarification that this was already in the General Fund. She
restated her motion as follows:
DESIGNATE $210,222 FOR THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE PROGRAM WITHIN THE
GENERAL FUND.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented things were getting fairly sloppy; DP #11 had been
withdrawn, leaving items 3 and 4. She was unclear what the motion was and suggested Mr. Passey read the
motion.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, Item 2, DP #11, had been withdrawn by Councilmember
Buckshnis.
Council President Fraley-Monillas agreed DP #11 was removed. There are now proposals by
Councilmembers K. Johnson and Councilmember Olson and she was unclear whether the intent was to zero
out the fund into the General Fund which was why she asked Mr. Passey to repeat the motion. Mr. Passey
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 7
relayed his understanding the Council was on Item 3, DP #35 to increase building the maintenance fund by
$210,222 and then the motion was to designate it for building maintenance in the General Fund so he was
also unclear.
Councilmember Olson said the confusion is it is a facilities maintenance line item within the General Fund.
The intent is $710,222 in 2021 which is the $500,000 in the preliminary budget plus DP #11, instead of
going into the general area of the General Fund, would go into facilities maintenance to increase that line
item to $710,222.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said there was no proposal for $500,000, it was only $210,222. She
pointed out there were two proposals related to DP 435, one that added funds and the other that removed it.
She suggested doing amendments individually. Mayor Nelson agreed with reviewing Councilmember's
proposals individually rather than in a group.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, the way Mr. Turley had amended the proposal on the
screen is confusing as it was her understanding that nothing stayed in Fund 016. The money would go into
the General Fund under the maintenance program; Councilmembers Olson and K. Johnson are both saying
the same thing. Mayor Nelson advised whatever Mr. Turley was doing on the screen was based on Council
input.
Mr. Turley clarified if the intent was to increase funding from $500,000, as proposed in the preliminary
budget, to $710,222, that would be proposal 3. If the Council takes that action and nothing else, it will
accomplish the intent.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said that would be to pass item 3 and withdraw item 4. She asked where
the $210,222 comes from that would be added to the maintenance fund. Mr. Turley said as proposed it
would be from the General Fund ending find balance.
Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding the money would come from Fund 016 that being zeroed
out. Mr. Turley agreed that was proposed in the Mayor's original budget so no motion is required to change
that. Councilmember Olson observed DP 411 would remain and the same amount added from the General
Fund. She expressed support for that.
Councilmember K. Johnson restated the motion:
TO TAKE $210,222 FROM FUND 016 AND MOVE IT TO THE GENERAL FUND MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS SECONDED.
Council President Fraley-Monillas pointed out there was a motion by Councilmember Olson on the floor
that Councilmember K. Johnson amended. She suggested Councilmember Olson withdraw her motion.
Councilmember Olson said she would be happy if the proposed $500,000 was increased by $210,222
however that was achieved. She agreed it was confusing due to the way Councilmember K. Johnson restated
the motion. Mr. Taraday suggested the Council adopt a motion that establishes the building maintenance
expenditure line item in the General Fund. Councilmember K. Johnson's motion includes an element that
is already part of the Mayor's proposed budget which is creating confusion. The Council needs to vote on
how much should the building maintenance line item in the General Fund be. Item 3 proposed by
Councilmember Olson to increase funding for Building Maintenance by $210,222 would accomplish that.
That is the most important thing for the Council to vote on from a policy setting, budgeting standpoint.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled Mr. Williams said for the last few years there was already a building
maintenance program in the General Fund which is why she withdrew her proposal (item 2). The proposal
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 8
now is to put the $210,222 into building maintenance program which Mr. Williams has said is already in
the General Fund.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented on the difference between sweeping it into the General Fund where
it can be used for any purpose versus sweeping it into a specific program. She did not want it to go into the
General Fund but into the building maintenance program within the General Fund.
Mr. Williams said program 66, facilities maintenance, is in General Fund.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Make the current 0.5 FTE Human Services
Program Manager a full-time (1.0 FTE)
General
position in the new "Human Services
5
19
Buckshnis
Fund
Department"
$48,956
Councilmember Buckshnis said she spoke to Ms. Wood who is doing a very good job. She also talked to
some of her housing people and the fact that Ms. Woods is doing a full-time job. If the intent is to establish
a Human Services Division, there needs be a program manager and there is already a part-time program
manager and she anticipated the duties would increase so she should be the full-time program manager. Her
qualifications fit the description and Ms. Neill Hoyson said there are no union issues. Councilmember
Buckshnis said it was important to have a full time program manager to assist Mr. Doherty with the Human
Services Division that is being created.
Mayor Nelson asked Councilmember Buckshnis if she had been talking to a City employee and negotiating
their contract. Councilmember Buckshnis assured there had not been any negotiations. Mayor Nelson
commented there are certain roles of the Administration and certain roles for Councilmember and this was
not a role for the Council. Councilmember Buckshnis said Councilmember L. Johnson had also done
research for the next proposal. She had only inquired if there would be any union issues and there were
none; there was no negotiation of a contract or negotiation with Ms. Woods. She simply spoke with Ms.
Woods about her job and what she was doing, she did not make any promises.
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty agreed Ms. Woods has been
working very hard, especially this year. There have been Council proposals to add a full-time social worker.
A lot of the extra time Ms. Woods has either essentially donated or the amount she has dedicated within
her approved '/2 time position has been ad hoc social worker type work because no one else is doing that
work. There is no longer an imbedded social worker in the Police Department so when calls come in, she
fills the void. With a full-time social worker, Ms. Woods could go back to doing the work that was expected
of the '/2 FTE position. He was confident that that was sufficient staffing for her role in the Human Services
Program. Councilmember Buckshnis said it was unfortunate Mr. Doherty had not responded to her email.
Councilmember Buckshnis withdrew Item 5.
Add a part time (0.5 FTE) one-year temporary
basis Human Services Administrative Assistant
L
General
position in the new "Human Services
6
New
Johnson
Fund
Department"
$48,956
Councilmember L. Johnson explained for some of the reasons mentioned earlier and especially since the
City is starting a program that will require considerable research to roll out, she was proposing a'/2 time
FTE temporary Human Services administrative assistant position. She offered to modify it to a TBD support
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 9
position if that was more desirable to Council. Her intent was a position that could scaffold this undertaking,
help with grant writing, review current available resources, do gap analysis, etc.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADD A PART TIME (0.5 FTE) ONE-YEAR TEMPORARY BASIS HUMAN
SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT POSITION IN THE NEW "HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT."
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if Councilmember L. Johnson talked to Mr. Doherty about how this
position would be put in place. She asked if this position would report to the Human Services program
manager or how did it fit into the Human Services Program. Councilmember L. Johnson said her proposal
was an increase in FTEs and she will defer to those involved in the program to determine who the person
reports to as that was not her role; her role was ensuring there was adequate staff to support the program.
Councilmember Paine said she liked this approach, explaining when programs start, there are a million
details that need to be covered. From reading Councilmember L. Johnson's notes, this is a 1-year temporary
position, but that could be worked out by those involved. It will be helpful to have administrative support
to address technical matters that are outside the specialist's bailiwick. She loved the idea of an
administrative services position.
Council President Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember L. Johnson's approach. A part-time
administrative assistant will be very important. Bringing in a social worker and having a part-time program
manager will create a lot more paper compliance. She has discussed this with Koenig, the entity that
prepared the housing report, and they agreed there would be a lot of paper compliance to ensure success. It
is not just about homelessness, but also mental health, drug addiction, medical issues, etc. It is a huge
undertaking for a social worker and they will need someone to assist with paper compliance. Obtaining
grants and state/federal funding will require tracking of numerous items. For the first year at least, this
position will help kick off the program in a positive way and help the people living in Edmonds who are
struggling with everyday life.
Councilmember Olson agreed it makes sense, anytime a new project starts, there is a lot of administration,
paperwork and details to keep track of. She was supportive of the concept. However, there was a proposal
for a new department funded with $550,000 plus the program manager which increases that to $598,000.
This would add another $49,000 which brings the Human Services Program to $647,000 minus $25,000 if
her amendment is approved to give $25,000 to the Waterfront Center/Senior Center program. Once there
was a vote on the motion, she requested the Council discuss the program as whole because otherwise the
total amount is getting lost in the trees.
Mayor Nelson pointed out all the Human Services packages are one after another in the list of proposals.
Mr. Doherty said he liked the notion of providing the budget authority to create the position. As a couple
Councilmembers stated, there can be a lot of paperwork and support needed for a program. The level is
current unknown so having the budget authority to hire a Y2 time support person for the first year may be
great, but staff also may discover less is needed. He liked having the budget authority instead of mandating
that this position will be created irrespective of the need. He preferred the concept of TBD so that the
necessary support could be hired. He said the budget authority could also be used to hire someone on a
contract basis for the first year.
For Councilmember Olson, Mr. Doherty said her calculation included the proposal that was dropped by
Councilmember Buckshnis, increasing the program manager to full-time, so the total is approximately
$50,000 less than she stated. In addition, the social worker position was an understanding in the program is
funded by the $500,000 budget Mayor Nelson proposed. While the Council may propose a Human Services
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 10
Department, Mayor Nelson's proposal was a Human Services Program or Division within the department
of Community Services. Creating a new department would require a director who reports to the Mayor
which was not the original proposal.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she happy to have this proposal read, TBD support position. She did not
want to limit it by defining it as an administrative assistant if that that would make determining what is
needed more difficult. She suggested her proposal be TBD support for the Human Services Division.
Councilmember K. Johnson did not support this proposal for a number reasons. She thanked Mr. Doherty
for clarifying that this would be a program within the Community Services Department. There is currently
a full-time administrative assistant position in that department who has been very instrumental in helping
Mr. Doherty. However, since that department is growing, there may be a redistribution of project
assignments and duties and the program manager could come from that. It also may take three months to a
year to hire a social worker based on how long it has taken to fill other positions. She recalled it took six
months to fill Ms. Woods' position. It may be premature to hire someone to assist the social worker because
that person has not yet been hired. If the need arises, the Council can always approve a quarterly budget
adjustment.
Councilmember K. Johnson pointed out the position currently held by Ms. Woods was developed last year
and it took six months to find the right person. The Council spent a lot of time sorting through that. She
supported the position but recalled it was a unanimous decision. One of the reasons she supported it was
she was assured by Council President Fraley-Monillas that a big portion of the job would be self -funded
and the ability to write grants was a significant part of the job. When this was first reviewed in the Public
Safety, Personnel & Planning Committee, she insisted that be part of the job description because it was
originally omitted. There was general agreement that being a grant writer was an important skill not for the
administrative assistant but for the program manager. However, she has not seen any evidence that any
grants have been applied for. She wanted to ensure the promise of the program manager being a self -funded
position was fulfilled. She recognized it may take a while to get off the ground. She summarized this
proposal is premature, unnecessary and duplicates the job description of the program manager.
With regard to grant writing portion of the human services manager, Councilmember L. Johnson agreed
that was one of the tasks in the job description; however, that position was filled in the middle of a pandemic
crisis. The individual in that position has been doing an exemplary job, has shown many times over the
need for that position and has been serving citizens in a crisis like no other. She was thankful that that
position existed even if grant writing may not have occurred to the level that was hoped and she was certain
grant writing would occur as soon as the more pressing needs were met for struggling citizens.
Councilmember Olson said she has only heard raves about what Ms. Woods is doing. She was supportive
of the concept and idea of an administrative support person but there is some confusion about the total
amount for the Human Services Division and perhaps it would be better to identify the total for the division
and providing a budget that support the items in that division and not doing line items. She will vote no on
this item although she supported having administrative support and would keep that in mind when
approving the total amount for the Human Services Division.
Councilmember Buckshnis was glad the Human Services Division would be part of the Community
Services Department. She was uncertain why there needed to be a dollar amount associated with the
administrative support. She pointed out the program manager only needed to be '/2 time and she questioned
whether a '/2 administrative assistant was necessary when the City was still trying to get its bearings with
this program. She supported the position with an amount of TBD as the extent of the position was unknown.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 11
Council President Fraley-Monillas advised it did not take Mr. Doherty six months to fill the Human Services
Program Manager position; recruitment began in January and Ms. Woods was hired in late February or
early March.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, advising Council President Fraley-Monillas took
a project away from her in June because the City had hired Ms. Wood.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said Councilmember K. Johnson's comments were not germane to the
discussion and she had not been able to complete her statement. Councilmember K. Johnson said she was
clarifying that Council President Fraley-Monillas' statement was incorrect. Mayor Nelson requested
Councilmember K. Johnson be allowed to finish. Councilmember K. Johnson said it was during the month
of June that she could not get the project to Council because Council President Fraley-Monillas said the
City had just hired Ms. Woods. She did not know the exact date she was hired, but it was definitely after
June. She recalled there was an effort to fill the position originally and then due to COVID, the selected
person withdrew. She summarized it was incorrect for Council President Fraley-Monillas to state Ms.
Woods was hired earlier.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed Councilmember K. Johnson's project was not taken away from
her, it was mostly completed and it was transferred to the Human Services Division because it was related
to human services, not the City Council. She assured Ms. Woods was hired sooner than six months into the
program and it was correct that the job description included the person would write grants to fund their
position. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was not the supervisor of that department so could not
make anyone write a grant. She agreed the expectation was that the program manager would write grants.
However, a part time administrative assistant could do a lot more than write grants. There are a lot of
programs and process in social services that someone needs to follow/track which is not a good use of the
program manager or social worker's time. She encouraged Council to support Councilmember L. Johnson's
proposal for a part-time administrative assistant for the Human Services Department to help it get started.
If it does not appear that it is needed at the end of the first year, it can be changed. It is perfectly reasonable
for Mr. Doherty to determine the hours needed for that work.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she had not been informed that human services would be part of
Mr. Doherty's department. There seems to be speculation but she was not clear that that was where the
department would land. It will be up to the Administration to make those decisions, not the Council. Mayor
Nelson reiterated this is a program not a department.
Councilmember Distelhorst expressed support for COUncilmember L. Johnson's amendment for TBD
assistance to the Human Services Program with $48,956. He pointed out there are 50 more Council
proposals and it is already 6:25 p.m. and hoped Councilmember would proceed more judicially.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND OLSON VOTING NO.
Mr. Turley clarified the Council approved a 0.5 FTE TBD position. He recognized Councilmembers may
wish to change their proposal during discussion and he encouraged them to state that clearly to avoid him
guessing.
Councilmember Olson recalled Councilmember L. Johnson's proposal was vaguer than '/2 time FTE and
was TBD necessary administrative support. Councilmember L. Johnson said her only change was in the
description; instead of ascribing an administrative assistant, she changed it to support position.
Councilmember Olson asked if the proposal was still a'/2 time FTE. Councilmember L. Johnson answered
that was her intent.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 12
General Combine Human Services positions together
7 1 New I Olson Fund I into the new "Human Services De artment" $ -
Councilmember Olson said her proposal was to combine the human services positions into the new Human
Services Division so when it showed up in the budget as a line item, there was more openness and
transparency with regard to what the department looked like. There was no dollar amount attached to her
proposal.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
COMBINE HUMAN SERVICES POSITIONS TOGETHER INTO THE NEW "HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT."
Councilmember L. Johnson said the idea of combining staffing and program funding was unusual and she
foresaw potential issues with combining them. Her preference would be to keep them as individual line
items. Mr. Turley said this does not have any dollar amount proposed so it is not really part of the budget
discussion, but more how the new program is organized. His intent had been to list all the Council proposals,
but he suggested the Council not vote on this because there was no budget involved. He included it to allow
Councilmember Olson an opportunity to share her thoughts.
Councilmember Olson recalled the financial reports include categories; she wanted everything to be lumped
together so when the Council was considering human services, all the amounts were included for financial
transparency. If this was not the right forum for that, it could be discussed by the Finance Committee. Mr.
Turley said that would be appropriate.
Councilmember Paine asked if this would have any other effect other than in the financials and whether
this was something Mr. Doherty had already considered. Mr. Doherty said his intent was to represent the
program in its entirety and be transparent about its constituent parts whether they are programmatic items
or staff costs. He agreed it could be discussed further in committee but that was his intent.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
General I Reduce Human Services funding from $500,000
8 1 22 1 Buckshnis Fund to $250,000 in "start-up vear" S (250.000)
Councilmember Buckshnis said her rationale was primarily mathematical. She believed $250,000 was an
adequate amount to get started. There are two large important proposals that she and other Councilmembers
have requested that total approximately $260,000, the PROS Plan Update and the code writer. With a startup
of $250,000 things could get going and budget amendments could be made as the program moves forward.
She supported the Human Services Division, but not knowing the ending fund balance, she felt from a
mathematical standpoint, the City has put funds aside for other programs, but never done $500,000. She
summarized $250,000 would be a reasonable amount to start out so the other two decision packages could
be considered.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
REDUCE HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING FROM $500,000 TO $250,000 IN "START-UP YEAR"
Councilmember Olson anticipated all the separate human services line items would total $500,000 so she
favored the $250,000 as more reasonable starting point. There were a lot of citizen letters stating this was
a large amount to start with. She preferred to fund the full-time social worker and provide some "gravy"
for other ideas and have staff return with a budget amendment regarding how that money would be spent.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 13
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she did not see this as "gravy" and was not interested in reducing
the budget for the Human Services Division to provide a code writer or funding for the PROS Plan. People
are living in the streets; she referred a person today to Acting Chief Lawless about another encampment in
Edmonds with numerous people who need some level of support. Funds for a code rewrite or PROS Plan
update could be identified from some other source. She was not saying the PROS Plan update or code writer
were not important, but with people losing their jobs and their housing, she did not support reducing human
services funding in the first year and felt that smacked of not truly being interested in assisting those who
need help from the City.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she was not interested in this reduction. Year after year the Council has
prioritized public safety in the form of police services; this year that is $l 1.9M or 27% of the proposed
2021 General Fund budget. For perspective, this is 1.3% of the General Fund budget. These funds will be
used for at -risk, vulnerable members of the community, preventative intervention -based assistance, housing
instability, mental health, substance abuse disorder, etc. These needs already existed and will only increase
especially with this crisis. This is a proactive and preventative approach to public safety and will relieve
stress from first responders and hopefully lead to a reduced need for police intervention. She fully supported
addressing public safety from a human services position and she applauded the Administration for
prioritizing this and including it in the budget.
COuncilmember Buckshnis said she agreed with both Council President Fraley-Monillas and
Councilmember L. Johnson's comments. She was not saying she was not dedicated to human services or
that it was needed. However, she anticipated the City would not spend $500,000 in the first month or even
in the first quarter. The yearend financials are not available yet; in the past the funds for new expenditures
had to be identified. Budget amendments can be made quarterly; if another $250,000 is needed, it can be
added. Her goal was to provide a balanced budget.
Councilmember Olson said she wanted to be on record showing she will affirm and support a budget
amendment up to the $500,000 originally proposed so Administration would not have to worry whether her
vote would be there later. She expressed support for the proposed amendment and could be counted on for
future related budget amendments.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she wrote a similar amendment, but was unsure where it was on the list.
It may be a mistake to put $500,000 into this fund because there were unintended consequences when the
Homelessness Fund was put into a new fund for COVID because it made the City ineligible for FEMA
reimbursement. In the news, there is talk about new COVID funding, new protections for small businesses,
and new support for families. It would be smart not to fill the fund from the City's own coffers. She was
not saying it was not needed, but that it would come from other sources, mostly federal and state
government, and if the City creates its own fund, it will not be eligible for reimbursement which she felt
was a fatal flaw. The City will need much more than $500,000 and will get it from the federal and state
governments.
Councilmember K. Johnson supported the initial $500,000 Homelessness Fund and $500,000 Opioid Fund,
but recalled the struggles to find anything productive to do with it. She preferred to close out those funds,
put them into the new social services program that will include a social worker, part-time administrative
assistant and program manager and use that as a starting point and leave the other money in the General
Fund where it could be accessed if necessary. She summarized it was a mistake to use the City's own money
and not be reimbursed by the federal government. Mayor Nelson said that amendment was up next.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said this is different than the Homelessness or Opioid Funds; she served
on both those committees. When staff applies for grants, they need to show the City has skin in the game.
If the concern is the City will be unable to obtain grants, in reality it will provide an opportunity to match
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 14
grants. She encouraged Council to vote this motion down and continue moving ahead with a social services
division. She was unsure Councilmembers understood how the funds would be used; it will be used to
provide funds to agencies who assist citizens in dire straits or it will be managed through a social worker
who will be able to serve people within the City. Most cities in the surrounding area put much more money
into social services and she encouraged the Council to leave the $500,000 in the budget and vote no on this
amendment.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
K I General Do not fund Human Services
9 1 22 Johnson Fund I program out of the General Fund $ (487.136)
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: if we move $54,000 from the Homelessness Fund
and $28,445 from the Opioid Fund to this new category, then there would be $82,445 total for this new
fund. I believe the remainder of this money should come from passthrough funds such as federal or state
COVID funds. When the City moved funds from the City's Homelessness Fund to the new COVID fund,
there were unintended consequences. This meant that that money was not eligible for FEMA
reimbursement. I think we would again be ineligible for federal reimbursement if you go ahead and create
a Human Services fund of $500,000. Instead, move $82,445 from the Homelessness and Opioid Funds into
this new account, thereby closing the old funds, then unload passthrough money from sources outside the
City to populate the remainder of the fund. It exceeded $500,000 in 2020 and will likely exceed $500,000
in 2021.
Councilmember Olson asked if Mr. Turley had weighed in on whether this was a valid, smart and prudent
approach. She asked if it was true the City would be using its own money instead of potential CARES funds
if it was set up in this manner and giving the City less opportunity to use funds from other levels of
government versus using local money. If that was true, this makes a lot of sense. Mr. Turley responded he
would not say whether it was smart or not. It appears there is an assumption that there will be more CARES
Act funding in 2021 and rather than giving that money to business and individuals in the community, it
would be used inhouse to fund this new program. Mayor Nelson said this need is based on the ongoing,
long term need for human services, not in response to COVID.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked the amount that remained in the Opioid and the Homelessness
Funds. Mr. Turley suggested moving onto another question to give him time to research that. Council
President Fraley-Monillas recalled funds had been drained from both and wanted to know how much was
left. She was not necessarily opposed to moving money out of those funds and moving it to social services
because both those topics are affected by social services.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, recalling $133,000 was being moved from the
Homelessness Fund into the Human Service Program as part of this decision package. Council President
Fraley-Monillas asked if that cleared out the Homelessness Fund. Mayor Nelson said he did not know.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of clarification, referring to page 28 in the Budget Book, move Opioid
Funds and the balance is $28,445. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if that was moving it from the
Opioid Fund to the Social Services Fund. Councilmember Paine advised it was DP #12. Council President
Fraley-Monillas observed that appeared to clear out the Opioid Fund.
Mr. Turley advised that was not on the table now. If those funds were moved, it would clear out the Opioid
Fund. As currently stated, $123,000 has been moved out of the Homelessness Fund so there would not be
any additional funds to fund this program.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 15
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if the $28,000 in the Opioid and $123,000 from the Homelessness
Fund were going to the social services budget. Mr. Turley answered currently only the $123,00 from the
Homelessness Fund is being transferred into new Human Services Program. Council President Fraley-
Monillas asked where the money in the Opioid Fund was going. Mr. Turley answered the Opioid Fund is
not part of this decision package. Council President Fraley-Monillas was unsure an amendment was
necessary if it had already been accomplished via the Mayor's budget. She was comfortable with moving
the money to social services because that was exactly how the money should be used. She expressed support
for the motion to move it to the social services program.
Councilmember Buckshnis said DP #22 is the transfer that Mr. Turley was talking about. She did not
support Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS CALLED THE QUESTION.
Council President Fraley-Monillas advised according to Roberts Rules, you cannot speak to the motion and
then call the question. Mr. Taraday advised he was uncertain off the top of his head whether that was
accurate but a super majority is required to call the question. Mr. Passey agreed a super majority was
required to call the question.
VOTE TO CALL THE QUESTION PASSED WITH A SUPER MAJORITY.
Mayor Nelson requested Mr. Turley restate the motion. Mr. Turley did not have the motion, but said the
current proposal was to remove $500,000 funding from the new program.
Councilmember K. Johnson restated the motion based on the conversation and previous votes:
MOVE THE REMAINING BALANCE FROM THE HOMELESSNESS FUND AND THE OPIOID
FUND TO THE HUMAN SERVICES FUND THEREBY CANCELLING THOSE PROGRAMS.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out DP #22 for the Human Services Program already has an interfund
transfer from the Homelessness Fund 018.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO MOVE THE FUNDS IN THE OPIOID FUND
INTO THE HUMAN SERVICES FUND.
Councilmember Distelhorst pointed out the transfer of the Opioid Fund is DP #12.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND OLSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Reduce Human Services funding by $25,000 in
1
General
order to increase funding to Senior Center
10 22
Olson
Fund
back to 2020 level of $75,000 1 $ -
Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding that if Councilmembers were asking for funding, they
also needed to identify a source. The Senior Center programs provide human services and they have been
stretched without any of their income -generating programs but continue to fund programs such as Meals
on Wheels, etc. She wanted to ensure the Senior Center was funded at least to the 2020 level knowing they
will continue to deal with the pandemic related restrictions at least in early 2021.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how much had been given to the Senior Center in 2020 to fund
COVID related programs in addition to what the City gave them in the budget. Mr. Turley advised the City
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 16
made a $75,000 donation in 2020. Mr. Doherty advised the Edmonds Cares funds approved by Council
provided $50,000 to the Senior Center to assist with programs they were providing via the Seniors Connect
Project related to meals, counseling, online classes and fitness, etc. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked
if those funds came from the City's General Fund. Mr. Doherty answered that was one of the initial
programs before the City received CARES Act money; it was derived from savings by foregoing City
programs, hiring people later in the year, etc. He agreed it was primarily General Fund. Council President
Fraley-Monillas summarized the Senior Center had already been given $125,000 from the General Fund.
Councilmember Olson asked if those were CARES Act funds. Mr. Doherty explained the City created its
own Cares Fund comprised of General Fund monies and CARES Act funds. The $50,000 provided to the
Senior Center via the Cares Fund was from the City's General Fund.
Council President Fraley-Monillas concluded, based on Mr. Doherty's comments, that the City has already
given the Senior Center $50,000 more than they were given any other year. She was not interested in
reducing the human services funding to provide money to the Senior Center when they had already been
provided an extra $50,000 this year. There are many agencies in Edmonds asking for money and if money
is given to one, it will need to be given to the other agencies.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, pointing out the Council was discussing the 2021
budget, not what was provided in 2020. Mayor Nelson recalled Council President Fraley-Monillas had
asked what had been given to the Senior Center in 2020. He agreed the budget under discussion was 2021.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she brought this up because Councilmember Olson said the City
had given the Senior Center $75,000 in 2020 from the General Fund and her point was the City had actually
given the Senior Center more than that.
Councilmember Olson agreed $75,000 was contributed to the Senior Center last year; she did not take into
account any additional COVID-related funds. She was baffled by taking funds away from an established
entity like the Senior Center that already provided human services, to provide funds to a program that was
not yet fully established. The Senior Center is already addressing an established human services need and
she did not see another source that was over funded.
Mr. Doherty said the Council will determine the human service priorities in 2021 and how those funds will
be spent. The City will solicit proposals from agencies that will address those programmatic objectives and
the Council will award contracts to those agencies. It is likely that an agency like the Senior Center, if the
Council puts a priority on senior -related services, would respond to that call for proposals and the Council
may potentially select an agency like the senior center to deliver those services at potentially even a greater
amount. The Council may not wish to pre -determine one particularly social/human services agency now
when there will be a comprehensive process for all such agencies and programmatic outcomes next year.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested Councilmember Olson withdraw her proposal because in the next
decision package she proposes increasing the funding to the Senior Center without taking money away from
the Human Services Department.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, stating there is no Human Services Department.
Councilmember Buckshnis clarified she meant the Human Services Program.
Councilmember Olson withdrew her proposed amendment.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed appreciation for Councilmember Olson's emphasis on providing
human service related resources to seniors and for Mr. Doherty's explanation of why this fund is being
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 17
created and an assessment of need and gap analysis will occur and then decisions will be made regarding
how to use the funds.
General Increase funding to Senior Center back to 2020
11 I New I Buckshnis I Fund I level of $75,000 1 $25,000
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled that amount had been provided to the Senior for 3-4 years. She was
interested in the joint partnership that the Senior Center and the City have had for a number of years; for
many years the contribution was $50,000 and it was increased to $75,000. She was aware the Human
Services Program would prioritize spending, but the Senior Center is a program the City has supported
forever and they have been provided additional funds this year during the pandemic. She pointed the Senior
Center is already providing services so the same level of funding should continue.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
INCREASE FUNDING TO SENIOR CENTER BACK TO 2020 LEVEL OF $75,000.
Councilmember Paine inquired about the existing funding for the Senior Center in the preliminary budget.
Mr. Turley answered $50,000 is budgeted for the Senior Center in 2021; this proposal is to increase that to
$75,000.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed the Council's proposed amendments include a request for
funding for the Edmonds Chamber and to increase funding to the Edmonds Center for the Arts. She asked
Mayor Nelson why he decided to reduce funding to these nonprofits in the preliminary budget.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating Mayor Nelson answered that question during
budget vetting.
Council President Fraley-Monillas requested Mayor Nelson answer her question. Mayor Nelson said his
role as the moderator was not to testify and suggested Mr. Turley respond. Council President Fraley-
Monillas asked why funding to the Chamber, Senior Center and ECA was reduced in the 2021 budget. Mr.
Turley said the only justification he knew of was the City was facing a tight budget year and revenues for
2021 are unknown and reductions were made across-the-board knowing that funding could be increased
later.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how much the citywide budget was decreased this year, relaying
she knew there was a reduction of $34M. Mr. Turley answered the citywide 2021 budget is $118M; the
2020 citywide budget was $140M. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed the budget had been
reduced by $22M between 2020 and 2021. Mr. Turley agreed that was the citywide reduction. Council
President Fraley-Monillas asked if that was why the voluntary contributions to the Senior Center, Chamber
and ECA were reduced. Mr. Turley said the General Fund budget was reduced from $49.6M to
approximately $45M. He did not have anything to add other than there were across-the-board cuts. Mayor
Nelson agreed.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the Senior Center is different from the Chamber, the ECA and other places
the City gives money to because this is a joint program with the City's Parks & Recreation Program. The
City owns the land and contributes that; paid for improvements such as the storm swales, parking, and
sidewalks; and helps them secure grants for the beach and other items. The City is also bringing in
multigenerational social programs by using Waterfront Center. She suggested the Senior Center needed to
be looked at differently than other entities and the City should support it because, "we are it and it is us."
Councilmember Olson expressed support for the additional funding.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 18
Councilmember Distelhorst said he was comfortable retaining the $50,000 in the budget and having the
assessment done during the Human Services Program in 2021.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS,
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE, L. JOHNSON
AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if a motion was necessary to indicate the Council will look at the
budget sometime in 2021 to determine if any more funding can be provided to the Waterfront Center. Mayor
Nelson said a $2M shortfall was predicted for 2020; depending whether those predictions come to fruition
or not will dictate what if any first quarter amendments are made including funding that was historically
provided to support the ECA, the Senior Center or other items.
General
12 1 29 Buckshnis Fund Reduce funding for Salmon Safe Program $ 02,000)
Councilmember Buckshnis said this was not written correctly, her intent was to postpone the funding for a
year because the Salmon Safe Certification Program looks at the gap analysis and existing policies in place
regarding safe salmon, low impact development, etc. The Stormwater Comprehensive Plan and Waterfront
Comprehensive Plan are upcoming so it would be more cost effective to delay this a year. The Salmon Safe
Certification does not impact grants. She was supportive of the program but preferred to delay it a year.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY , TO REDUCE FUNDING
FOR SALMON SAFE PROGRAM BY $32,000.
Councilmember Olson said her initial reaction to this was similar to Councilmember Buckshnis' that this
was just a validation and she would prefer to use the money in a way that actively impacts the environment.
However in conversation with Joe Scordino, Save Our Marsh, she was convinced the findings of this
program could be incorporated into writing the code. She summarized 2021 was the perfect time to fund
this.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION.
Add $20,000 for assistance with Waterfront
General Comp Plan update (using money made
13
New
Buckshnis
Fund available by reducing Salmon Safe Program)
$20,000
Councilmember Buckshnis explained this was very important for the Mayor's legislative agenda. Edmonds
Crossing is mentioned numerous times in the Comprehensive Plan; this would assist with removing
reference to Edmonds Crossing.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
ADD $20,000 FOR ASSISTANCE WITH WATERFRONT COMP PLAN UPDATE (USING MONEY
MADE AVAILABLE BY REDUCING SALMON SAFE PROGRAM).
Councilmember Distelhorst expressed support for this amendment.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, asking if there was a budget amount. Mayor
Nelson advised it was $20,000.
Councilmember Paine asked if this could be included in DP #26 which was a similar amount to prepare for
the Comprehensive Plan update. Development Services Director Shane Hope answered this was proposed
as an addition. The proposal for $20,000 for an equity and climate gap analysis of the Comprehensive Plan
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 19
is overarching to review a lot of issues. The intent of Councilmember Buckshnis' proposed amendment was
a specific, targeted update to the Comprehensive Plan in 2021 to deal with waterfront, ferry terminal, marsh,
etc. issues. Some additional funds will be necessary either via this proposed amendment or a quarterly
budget amendment. Councilmember Paine expressed support for the motion.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Olson, K General Eliminate Commuter Trip Incentive for one
14 37 Johnson I Fund I vear I S r36_nnnl
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: Only 15% of the workforce uses these funds. The
City has 200 eligible employees so 15% is 30 employees at a rate of $1200 per employee. Right now most
employees work from home. People could be refunded for their daily bus fare much cheaper than buying
monthly bus passes or ORCA fares. I suggest this program be reimagined in view of COVID and remote
working practices and not funded as proposed in 2021.
Councilmember Olson said her rationale was very similar; a lot of people will opt out of public transit for
safety's sake even if they are still working in person and this is an opportunity to redistribute those funds.
The next amendment proposes using it for the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce. She supported this
program and encouraging City employees to be smart commuters for the environment's sake as well as to
be good to the employees but this is one year where making this change makes sense.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
ELIMINATE COMMUTER TRIP INCENTIVE FOR ONE YEAR IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,000.
Councilmember Distelhorst said information was provided by Mr. Williams regarding a number of City
employees who are still working at their jobs and the fact that this incentive applies for all travel, not just
commuting. Mr. Williams indicated the cost of this program is only expected to be $12,771 because the
rate for this program is sliding. He said the actual cost is less than budgeted but maintains funds for Climate
Action Goals, Comprehensive Plan and everywhere that eliminating single occupancy vehicles is in the
City's guiding principle documents.
Councilmember Olson questioned Councilmember Distelhorst's last statement, asking whether the $36,00
provides more than just support for people commuting. Mr. Williams answered the $36,000 is a
combination of all commute trip reduction efforts, approximately $12,000 of which is not the ORCA
program. The ORCA program was budgeted to be about $24,000 in 2021 at a unit price of $112.06 each
and after the budget was submitted, Sound Transit informed they were reducing the price to their municipal
program customers to $59.06, about a 47% reduction and the net result is $12,771 to provide 250 year -long
ORCA passes. It also supports five ongoing carpooling programs. That would be lost in 2021 if this is not
funded.
Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged Councilmembers to vote against this proposed change. Staff
are getting to work by different methods and means; it may not be all employees because not everyone is
willing to ride with others, bike or take public transit, but this is a drop in the bucket.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained as a transportation planner, she worked for King County when the
CTR law came from the legislature. It is a program specifically identified for large employers with 50+
employees. In Edmonds, that includes the Edmonds School District, Swedish Edmonds Hospital and the
City. It is not a global program for every type of public transportation, but is specifically designed to provide
an incentive for people working for larger employers. Sound Transit is marketing its ORCA program which
has nothing to do with CTR. The CTR program is a passthrough from the state to the city involving
incentives to get people out of single occupancy vehicles. As such the City will not have so many trips that
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 20
it needs to spend this money at the rate of $1200/employee. The City could pay 100% for Mr. Williams'
travel on the ferry and Mr. Hauss' travel on the train or anyone taking the bus and still spend significantly
less. Due to COVID, she proposed setting aside CRT for a year and reinstating it once employees return.
Councilmember Distelhorst apologized for misspeaking with regard to Mr. Williams' email.
Councilmember Olson recognized the ORCA pass could be used on people's downtime, but most people,
other than frontline workers were not going a lot of places. The City has been a good to its employees in
terms of hazard pay, COLA, etc. during a time when a lot of people are unemployed. She acknowledged
this was unlikely to have a large impact on most people. For those who were impacted, that could be
considered their COVID share for the greater good by allowing the funds to be contributed to the Chamber
of Commerce. She assured it would feel like a greater amount of money to the Chamber if it were
redistributed there.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS,
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE, L. JOHNSON
AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
General Increase support for Edmonds Chamber of
15 37 Olson Fund Commerce (in lieu of funding the Commuter
Trip Incentive) "6_nnn
Councilmember Olson commented everyone knows how much the Chamber is struggling; they furloughed
two of their three employees and are just trying to cover the minimums to stay open and supportive. She
has been on a lot of calls and Chamber members are very grateful for everything the Chamber is doing with
regard to support, networking, and informing of new grants, laws and impacts to businesses. Many
community members would be happy to have their tax dollars go toward an entity whose work directly
impacts them and to keep them alive for future events.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
INCREASE SUPPORT FOR EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$36,000. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, PAINE,
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the rationale was the same as mentioned by Councilmember Olson.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
INCREASE FUNDING TO EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BACK TO 2020 LEVEL OF
$10,000. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K.
JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
Do not purchase 2 Ford Explorer Police Dept
511 - patrol vehicles in 2021, delay replacement until
17 45 Olson Fleet 2022
Councilmember Olson said often people have a plan for replacing their cars every ten years or whatever,
but sometimes a good car lasts longer. She wanted to take a different approach this year knowing that funds
were tighter and understanding there could be a later budget request if there repairs justified purchasing a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 21
new vehicle. It was her understanding that although police cars may look new, the Police Department puts
a lot of mileage on them but they are well maintained. She preferred to handle replacement of one or both
as a budget amendment in the event that was necessary.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
NOT PURCHASE 2 FORD EXPLORER POLICE DEPT. PATROL VEHICLES IN 2021, DELAY
REPLACEMENT UNTIL 2022 IN THE AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $100,000.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked where funding for police cars comes frorn and whether the proposed
change will affect the General Fund balance. Mr. Turley answered vehicles are purchased by the Fleet
Division, but the cost of purchasing and maintaining vehicles is paid for by the departments that use them.
Ultimately this would be a cost to the Police Department. In this case since Fleet is an internal service fund,
Police has already funded the two vehicles so it would not really affect the General Fund this year but Fleet
Fund 511 would not be depleted as much this year, saving the Fleet Fund but not affecting the General
Fund. Councilmember L. Johnson observed initially the funds came from the General Fund to create Fund
511. Mr. Turley answered yes, funding for these two police vehicle came from the General Fund.
Councilmember Olson asked if a tweak could be made to what came out of the General Fund as well
because it seemed like more was being funded from the General Fund than was being removed. She asked
if there was any way to move the money that had been moved to Fleet back to the General Fund Mr. Turley
answered the preliminary budget already includes taking some money from the Fleet Fund. If a
Councilmember wanted to propose lowering the rate that goes to the Fleet Fund from the General Fund by
$100,000 this year, that could be done.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
LOWER THE RATE THAT GOES TO THE FLEET FUND FROM THE GENERAL FUNDS BY
$100,000 THIS YEAR.
Councilmember Buckshnis said Fund 511 comes from the General Fund and a large amount is maintained
in Fund 511 for Fleet.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the original motion was based on police vehicles used by patrol
officers. Councilmember Olson answered yes. Councilmember K. Johnson was opposed to that motion
because police vehicles are officers' main instrument for doing their job. Just like their gun, their car needs
to be in tiptop condition. The B Fund allocates how often those are replaced. She had a similar proposal,
deferring purchase of two trucks because they are not essential to job functions in the same way that police
vehicles are. They are useful for employees but she preferred to defer their purchase for one year depending
on what the mechanic's report says. She requested Mr. Turley read what she wrote regarding that proposed
change. Mayor Nelson advised the Council was addressing one amendment at a time. Councilmember K.
Johnson did not support the motion.
At Council President Fraley-Monillas' request, Mr. Turley restated the motion:
LOWER THE RATE THAT THE GENERAL FUNDS PAYS TO THE FLEET FUND BY $100,000
THIS YEAR.
Council President Fraley-Monillas observed that would not indicate which vehicles would not be purchased
for $100,000. Mr. Turley said his understanding was Councilmember Olson took the proposal not to
purchase the vehicles off the table; the vehicles would be purchased but the General Fund would be charged
$100,000 less than originally budgeted.
Councilmember Olson suggested lowering the amount by $100,000 and allow staff to figure out what
vehicles needed to be purchased. She was open to staff returning with a budget amendment if the vehicle
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 22
purchases were necessary. She thought it was possible these vehicles may not need to be replaced this year.
Mr. Williams relayed the preliminary budget eliminated all contributions for General Fund vehicles to the
B Fund in 2021, approximately $362,570. Mr. Turley advised DP #46 in the Mayor's proposed budget is
to remove the B Fund rates for the General Fund which is $362,570, money the General Fund would have
paid Fleet Fund 511.
Councilmember Olson observed vehicle needs were expressed separately in the budget. With the removal
of that amount, there would not be funds for any vehicle replacements. Mr. Williams advised money is
placed in Fleet Fund 511 over a vehicle's life for replacement when the time comes; those contributions for
General Fund vehicles were eliminated in the preliminary budget. That does not change the schedule for
purchasing these two vehicles. A method was determined years ago based on mileage when vehicles need
to be replaced before maintenance costs increase. All the money for General Fund vehicle replacements is
eliminated in the preliminary 2021 budget to save money.
Councilmember Paine asked if this would take out an additional $100,000 for the purchase of these vehicles
to be returned to the General Fund. Mayor Nelson said that was his impression.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON CALLED THE QUESTION.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE, L. JOHNSON AND K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Do not replace the 2003 Chevrolet pickup or
511 - the 2002 Chevrolet 1/2 Ton pickup - savings
18 45 K Johnson Fleet unknown
Mr. Turley said the savings were unknown because Councilmember K. Johnson did not know which
replacement vehicles would be purchased in 2021. He read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: it will
lead to further replacement of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Chevrolet 2003 pickup for one more year,
what is this vehicle's mileage and what does the mechanic say in his report? Can we also defer the
replacement of the 81 SWR 2002 Chevy '/2 ton pickup for one more year? What is this vehicle's mileage
and what does the mechanic say?
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
NOT REPLACE THE 2003 CHEVROLET PICKUP OR THE 2002 CHEVROLET 1/2 TON PICKUP
- SAVINGS UNKNOWN.
Councilmember Olson asked if Councilmember K. Johnson's questions had been answered. She felt these
were ancient vehicles and they may be due for replacement, but if the mechanic says they are doing great,
they may be old gems. Mr. Williams said these are 17 and 18 year old vehicles. Payback on such vehicles
is typically structured for 15 years. They are both well over that and it is time to replace them. The money
is in the fund for replacement; contributions for their replacement ceased because enough had been
accumulated to replace them.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON CALLED THE QUESTION.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING YES;
AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRA LEY- M ON I LLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
421 - Do not fund Phase 12 of the Waterline
19 1 47 1 K Johnson I Water Replacement Program
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 23
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: this project would replace some of the water meters
in the City. The total project cost would be $3.1 M over multiple years. After the meters were replaced, then
we would have to pay salaries, benefits, equipment and vehicle charges in order to read the meters and
create bimonthly bills. According to the City's climate report, it was recommended the City replace the old-
fashioned meters with new digital devices that could be read remotely and could retire the need for meter
readers in the field, trucks to read the meters and the two utility clerks who must prepare bills every month.
My recommendation is this not be funded in 2021 and that the Public Works and Finance Departments
move away from a business -as -usual model towards a more energy efficient model. The year 2021 can be
used to talk with vendors and price out a new and improved digital reading system with automated billing
devices.
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled from the climate report related to 2020 climate update that one
important way to make a significant climate change improvement was to move toward a digital system and
away from the current system. She was sure Mr. Williams would defend the current system but she felt the
City should take the climate report to heart. She did not have access to the report but recalled that and it
stuck in her mind as something very progressive.
Councilmember Olson liked the concept of a more climate friendly model and requested Mr. Williams
weigh in. Mr. Williams liked that idea as well; it has been evaluated numerous times from a financial
standpoint. The cost of converting all meters, putting in the towers to operate it wirelessly and the software
was approximately $3M. This is currently accomplished with one full-time meter readers with some fill-in
for absences. The meter reader drives a truck to a location and walks a long time reading meters before
driving to another area. The climate benefit would be the fuel the vehicle burns and he was uncertain that
exact amount. When he worked in Bremerton, they converted to digital meter reading and he recalled it
was expensive and done over a period of several years. He assured he liked the idea of a digital system but
the cost was quite high.
Mr. Turley said the meeting had reached the allocated three hours and he was uncertain if an extension was
needed. Mr. Passey advised this is a special meeting so there were not constraints on the length.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
Councilmember K. Johnson said Mr. Williams indicated a new system would cost $3M but that is unknown.
She was not suggesting the decision be made this year but pause to evaluate and make a decision. No one
would lose their job this year as there would be a transition period. She felt this was a good time before
committing to the technology.
Councilmember Distelhorst raised a point of clarification, DP #47 is replacement of pipe and other
locations. He was unsure how that related to Councilmember K. Johnson's comments about meter reading.
Mr. Williams said this decision package is designing waterline replacements for 2022.
Councilmember K. Johnson said if the decision package did not match the description, she offered to
withdraw and hope that things are matched up. Mr. Turley said the proposed amendment came from
Councilmember K. Johnson and he included it as written. At Mayor Nelson's request, Mr. Turley reread
Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale. Councilmember K. Johnson suggested passing on this amendment
and she would try to sort it out before the budget was approved.
Remove DP 56 funds for researching Willow
Buckshnis,
422 -
Creek Daylighting until land ownership issue is
20
56
K Johnson
Storm
resolved
$ 80,000)
$(70,000)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 24
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: I disagree that money should be spent to consider
another alternative for daylighting Willow Creek. We should only consider an alternative on City -owned
property. We know that the desired channel should be located on the Unocal owned portion for the Edmonds
Marsh. This is a marsh and the restoration should be a Parks project not a Storm project. No time or money
should be wasted while the Unocal site is being cleaned. The fact of the matter is that WSDOT has dropped
the multimodal project from their long range plans; it is no longer being considered as a capital project by
WSDOT. I recommend that the Parks Department take over this project from the Public Works Department
where it resided until a change was made in the 2020 budget documents after Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation
and Cultural Services Manager left the City. I suggest we work to remove this project from the City's
Comprehensive Plan. We should instead work with state and local agencies to reimagine the long term use
of the Edmonds Marsh. We should initiate a master plan for the marsh and all lands located within the
newly adopted FEMA 100-year floodplain including but not limited to the following landowners: Unocal,
WSDOT, Burlington Northern, and the Port of Edmonds.
Councilmember Buckshnis said ownership is very important and WRIA 8 technical committee has stated
there could be much more environmentally friendly use of the stream if the property ownership is figured
out. Mr. Williams has also said that NOAA pulled their grant last year due to ownership issues. She did
not think any money should be spent until the City figured out what was going on. She applauded Mayor
Nelson for his legislative agenda that the Council would see next week, relaying there should be no reason
to fund this.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO REMOVE DP 56 FUNDS FOR RESEARCHING WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING UNTIL
LAND OWNERSHIP ISSUE IS RESOLVED.
Councilmember Paine asked if this decision package was to begin design work. Mr. Williams answered
yes, there were two decision packages for the marsh in Stormwater. This was one of them, $80,000 to be
spent from stormwater rate revenues because citizens have said many times that they did not like the first
six design alternatives and there seemed to be a preference to have another design where the end would be
moved further eastward of the railroad tracks. He would like to develop that concept so that it could be
vetted and determine if it met muster with citizens and experts so that when the property issue was resolved,
it would not take another year to go through that process and further delay opening the channel. He
summarized his intent was to get the project started as quickly as possible, recognizing that there are a lot
of challenges. If some things can be done ahead of time, the project can move ahead quickly when the
property issue is cleared up.
Councilmember Paine asked how long it would take to design a new configuration and whether the size of
the property impacted the dollar value. Mr. Williams said more and more is known about the Unocal
property and they are getting closer to working out an arrangement between Unocal, Ecology and WSDOT
on finalizing the cleanup. The intent is to move the northern end of the channel further east, maintain a
certain amount of sinuosity, but eventually the channel, regardless of where it starts, needs to go through a
fairly narrow point to get out under the bridge under the railroad tracks.
Councilmember Paine restated her question, how long would it take to develop a new design and does the
size of the property change the dollar value. Mr. Williams said it was hard to say with regard to the dollar
value, but it could be done in 2021. It was not a tremendous amount of work but it will require significant
public outreach to explain the alternative and get input. Councilmember Paine asked if the price would
increase if the scope of the project were doubled if the Unocal property became available. Mr. Williams
answered it would depend on the ultimate owner. The City could look to acquiring it from the state
somehow if the Council wanted to own the property. There is an ask to the legislature this year related to
the property ownership issue.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 25
Councilmember Olson said when the transfer of the land occurs, WSDOT still has to go through a public
process with their stakeholders before they can transfer it to the City so there is still a lot of time even if the
transfer from Unocal to WSDOT happened right away. She recommended the City stop guessing at the
configuration because the size of the parcel is unknown, and when/if the property will be transferred
because even the people who are the most vested in moving forward prefer not to spend any money on
planning until more is known.
Councilmember K. Johnson observed Mr. Williams, who wants to make progress on this project, said the
first six alternatives the consultant studied in coordination with the City were all rejected. They were not
funded by the granting agency and part of the reason was none of them made sense from a salmon
perspective. Moving further east would have the same result. Until there is a large piece of property, moving
slightly east will not solve the issue because it is a very narrow tract of land and the City can only plan for
the properties it owns. There would be no shading of Willow Creek, no woody debris; it would basically
go from a pipe to a ditch. She preferred to stop and work on the larger picture, ownership of the entire marsh
property. There also may be a desire to eliminate the multimodal program from the Comprehensive Plan
and work with all the agencies to do a larger marsh plan. Save Our Marsh, Students Saving Salmon, the
technical work that has been done, and the FEMA maps all point toward looking at a bigger picture which
is where the time and resources should be spent.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the City should not be funding anything anymore. The original grant was
funded and closed out. The City needs to figure out the ownership, whether it is purchased or transferred.
Parks & Recreation does not usually have shovel ready things, that is something Stormwater does. Projects
in WRIA 8 grant funding often change because the environment changes. She suggested not funding this
now and wait to figure out what happens in the future.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, OLSON,
PAINE, L. JOHNSON, AND K. JOHNSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST VOTING NO.
Move $430,000 from Storm fund 422 to 017
21 1 62 1 Buckshnis 91 422 / 017 Marsh Fund for future Marsh work 1 $430 000 $430,000
Mr. Turley said he wrote these as they were sent to him and he did the best he could to distill long emails
into a description for this list. As he understood it, this proposal was to transfer $430,000 from the Storm
Fund to the 017 Marsh Fund. He said that could not be done, funds could not be transferred straight from
Storm to the Marsh Fund. Money has to be spent directly from the Storm Fund so the wording of the
proposal would need to be changed.
Councilmember Buckshnis said this is a philosophical question that was brought up by Mr. Williams. She
recalled with the NOAA grant last year, $250,000 was from the Stormwater Fund and $200,000 was from
the General Fund. If it was designated in Stormwater and not the General Fund, it came from utility
ratepayers. Mr. Turley advised any money in the Storm Fund is a carryforward of budget authority, not
cash transferred from another fund or collected via rates, it is only budget authority so grantors see that the
City has the funds already budgeted and planned and are serious about the work.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested defunding it, putting into the General Fund and then put it into 017.
Mr. Turley said to accomplish that, DP #62 would need to be eliminated and putting money into 017 would
be General Fund money. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding of Mr. Turley's explanation
that the funds cannot be transferred.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 26
Councilmember Buckshnis said there are stormwater components associated with the marsh. She suggested
continuing with other amendments and allow her time to think about this. She observed the next
amendment, item 22, was the same thing so it was postponed for later discussion as well.
General Increase funding to Edmonds Center for the
23 1 New I Buckshnis I Fund I Arts from $50,000 to $75,000
Councilmember Buckshnis said everyone is hurting, but she anticipated the Council would not approve
this. The ECA has had a tough year and this amendment would restore the funding to last year's level.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
INCREASE FUNDING TO EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS FROM $50,000 TO $75,000.
Councilmember Olson said she was more hopeful than Councilmember Buckshnis and reminded what an
economic engine the ECA was in the community. There is some talk about venues in the state package, but
she was uncertain the ECA would be eligible because they are quasi -governmental. Council President
Fraley-Monillas, Council liaison to the ECA, said she believed the ECA was eligible to receive funds, but
they are distributed on a priority basis. Councilmember Olson said that is not much money and ECA has a
lot of overhead; all employees are working reduced hours and several have been furloughed. She was
hopeful the Council would support this amendment.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if the City gave the ECA any money in the 2020 budget, Mr.
Turley said the City gave the ECA $50,000 in 2020. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed the
Council turned down the request to increase funding to the Senior Center and greatly reduced funding to
the Chamber so what was fair for the goose was fair for the gander. She felt fondly toward the ECA but did
not think it was the appropriate thing to do now. Perhaps as 2021 progresses, the City could look at its
budget in the first or second quarter and make a decision with regard to additional funding. Rather than
provide funding to one entity, the City should provide it equally to avoid showing favoritism.
Councilmember K. Johnson did not support the City providing any money to the ECA. Last year the City
gave the ECA $75,000 and they paid back $50,000. The whole idea is the City is a guarantor of their bonds
and during the fiscal downturn, they were unable to pay their bills so the City decided to help them out. It
would be revenue neutral if the City told the ECA not to pay them this year, recognizing they are in financial
straits. She summarized the City should not give any money to the ECA and should forgive any payment
this year.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said that had already been done. Mr. Turley explained the loan
agreement with the ECA states they do not have to make loan payments if they are running a deficit. Their
deficit is bad enough this year that they will not be obligated to make a loan payment to the City and in fact
have not budgeted a loan payment to the City in 2021.
Councilmember K. Johnson said it was silly for the City to give to the goose and not the gander. She
preferred to maintain the status quo and reevaluate as the year progresses.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, PAINE AND L.
JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
General Remove contribution to Edmonds Center for
24 1 New I K Johnson I Fund the Arts
Councilmember K. Johnson said her rationale was related to the discussion above.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 27
Councilmember K. Johnson withdrew the amendment.
Paine, General
25 1 New Buckshnis I Fund I 3-Year Temporary Position for Code Re -write $ 140,000
Councilmember Paine explained this had been a long term plan for the Council for probably a decade. The
proposal is a 3-year temporary code writer housed in Development Services. The first year's cost would be
$140,000 for a full-time person to work with existing staff. It will get the code rewrite underway and
progress can be reevaluated next year and the next year.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
FUND A 3-YEAR TEMPORARY POSITION FOR CODE RE -WRITE IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,000.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested delaying this change until item 86 or bring item 86 forward as
looking at the two independently did not make sense. She had a lengthy discussion with Ms. Hope regarding
the ideal situation and they both agreed it would be important to have a long term new position or two to
get this work done. The code is not just written and put away; it needs to be updated and maintained. She
did not support this proposal, but recognized Councilmember Paine, Buckshnis and she were trying to solve
the problem identified as a high priority at the Council retreat. She agreed with the concept but had an
entirely different approach.
Councilmember Olson said she did not see a downside to affirming this proposal as it could be described
in a different way in a future budget if the proposed amount was correct for the hire or perhaps the wording
could be changed. She recalled a 2005 quote from a staff member that the code rewrite was really overdue.
She recognized the code causes numerous problems and it is just not good code anymore. She supported
committing to getting a code rewrite started and having someone full-time to do the work and not putting
it off.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the Council budgets year by year; the proposal is for next year. She agreed
the code rewrite was necessary and had been a priority for a long time. She did not agree with
Councilmember K. Johnson's concept.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested Councilmembers Paine, Buckshnis and she work with Ms. Hope on
a mutually satisfactory proposal and bring it back next week. She asked Ms. Hope to weigh in.
Councilmember Paine pointed out the Council was discussing the amendment that she and Councilmember
Buckshnis proposed, not Councilmember K. Johnson's amendment. Councilmember K. Johnson said they
are not mutually exclusive but are two different ways. She was suggesting they all work together. She
respectfully requested the motion be withdrawn with the agreement of the second and they agree to a
discussion with Ms. Hope and her and return next Tuesday with one proposal that all four agree on.
Councilmember Paine said she spoke with Councilmember K. Johnson about her proposal which includes
having a staff attorney assigned. She was uncertain she wanted to leap toward that right now. There are
people in the job classification identified by Ms. Hope this past year and this was adequate for the needs of
the department.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said every Councilmember has the right with every item to discuss
everything they want; no Councilmember owns these items. If a Councilmember does not like a proposal,
they simply vote no, there is no reason to negotiate a meeting when there does not appear to be agreement.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 28
Councilmember Buckshnis was not in favor of micromanaging or developing a new way of doing things.
A code writer is needed now, if an attorney is needed in the future, that can be considered. She preferred to
give Ms. Hope what she needed now.
Councilmember K. Johnson pointed out she has specialized knowledge in this area; she has a master's
degree in city and regional planning in coordination with the law school with Rutgers University. She also
has experience working with the City of Bellevue where there was a full-time legal planner; someone from
the UW Law School who worked full-time in the planning department. There was also a full-time urban
designer. These are highly skilled people, not just planners. Code writing, long range and current planning
require entirely different skill sets. Her intent was to create a system she found worked. The City has not
been successful in hiring a code planner and she did not think the Council understood the skills necessary
to do the job. The people were not lawyers in the usual sense, but understand land use law and code writing;
that is their specialty and the needs are full-time.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained she put together a Cadillac, ideal system necessary in the planning
department and she viewed the approach in Councilmembers Paine and Buckshnis' proposal and every
proposal in the past as get something done, put a Band-Aid on it. From all her years on the Planning Board
and City Council, every which way imaginable has been tried, there have been three different Planning
directors and nothing has worked. She preferred to abandon the Band-Aid approach and do it right via a
discrete work program using people who are highly skilled and motivated to work in this area. She urged
the Council to vote no on the proposal by Councilmembers Paine and Buckshnis.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was aware of Councilmember K. Johnson's background, but the code
rewrite did not happen because staff got busy and no code work got done. Ms. Hope and the experts in the
department will determine who to hire for this position. She did not think a Cadillac version was required;
a code writer is needed to begin the process under Ms. Hope who is a very intelligent and valuable
employee.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she prepared a proposal and discussed it with Ms. Hope. She incorporated
her input and cost estimates based on a senior and assistant planner. Recognizing these are very specialized
positions, she was not calling them planners.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Paine, I General
26 I New I Buckshnis I Fui I Add funding for PROS Plan Update 120.060
Councilmember Paine explained this is a proposal to update the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS)
Plan, necessary to obtain specific Recreation Conservation Office (RCO) grants. The City will miss some
key grant schedules if the update is not done this year.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO
ADD FUNDING FOR PROS PLAN UPDATE IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked the source of the funds, noting between this proposal and the last
proposal, it increases the budget approximately $250,000. Councilmember Paine answered ending fund
balance. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked the amount of the ending fund balance. Mr. Turley
answered the General Fund ending fund balance by yearend would be about $18-19M. Council President
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 29
Fraley-Monillas asked if that included reserves. Mr. Turley explained the City has $7.7M in operating
reserves, $2M set aside for Civic Field which leaves approximately $9M depending on how things shake
out next month. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented the budget had been cut by approximately
$2M this year to protect funds and now he was saying there was $9M. Mr. Turley said it is a moving target,
the City has more fund balance than the minimum required.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained in an effort to evaluate this proposal, she sent an email to Parks,
Recreation & Cultural Services Director Angie Feser to ask when the last PROS Plan update was completed,
when it was adopted and when the next update was due. Ms. Feser's response was according to Mayor
Nelson she should not ask any questions of directors but ask him. However, tonight Mayor Nelson indicated
he does not participate in the discussion. She questioned how the proposal could be evaluated if she did not
know when the PROS Plan was last updated and when the next update was due. She participated in the last
two PROS Plan updates so is very familiar with the process but it seems with the delay of Civic Field, the
City should be eligible to ask for more RCO funding for that project. She did not think the City would miss
out on any funding as there is Civic Field, the 4"' Avenue Corridor and plenty of projects to apply for grants.
Councilmember Buckshnis advised the PROS Plan update needs to be done by next year and if it is not
updated, the City could lose out on a lot of grants. The Plan is updated every ten years. She offered to
forward Ms. Feser's email on this subject. It is very important to have the PROS Plan in place to obtain any
type of RCO funding. The marsh is a major part of the PROS Plan. She suggested the source could be to
defund some of the $450,00 in Storm.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she has been on the Council for nine years and participated in the last
PROS Plan update and it wasn't ten years ago. She asked a very simple question and felt Mayor Nelson
and Ms. Feser should answer her questions rather than relying on emails or information from other
Councilmembers. She reiterated her questions, when was the last plan adopted and when does the next plan
need to be adopted. Mayor Nelson requested Ms. Feser respond. Ms. Feser advised the PROS Plan was last
updated in 2016. RCO requires that the PROS Plan be no older than six years old to be eligible to apply for
any grants within RCO state and federal programs. To remain eligible, the City will need to meet the
deadline in February 2022 which provides 2021 to go through the process and submit a completed and
adopted PROS Plan by February 2022 to be eligible for that funding .cycle. If the City does not, it will not
be eligible until 2024 to apply for grants and receive funding in 2025. Marina Beach Park is a perfect
example of a project in the local parks category that the City should apply for again in two years for a
$500,000 grant. To apply for funding for any other marsh related programs or grants require a current PROS
Plan.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
General Add 3 "frozen" positions back into budget - (2)
27 1 New K Johnson I Fund I police officers and a maintenance custodian 1 $385,972
Councilmember K. Johnson pointed out Mr. Turley had explained earlier that the maintenance position had
been filled and was not frozen. Mr. Turley suggested Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal would then be
to add two frozen police officer positions back into the budget. Councilmember K. Johnson agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY , TO ADD 2 "FROZEN"
POSITIONS BACK INTO BUDGET - (2) POLICE OFFICERS.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked how the positions would be funded. Councilmember K. Johnson
answered the positions would be unfrozen which is where the money comes from. She spoke to the
importance of maintaining the core police force. There is one vacant position that needs to be filled as well
as a pending retirement. In talking with Acting Chief Lawless, she learned there is a very tight recruitment,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 30
training and orientation process. Not filling these positions will have a multiplier effect throughout the year.
The Council needs to support the Police Department regardless of who the new Police Chief is and maintain
a core staff.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked when these positions were frozen. Mr. Turley answered July or
August 2020. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked where the funding, approximately $300,000, would
come from as it was not currently in the budget because the positions are frozen. Mr. Turley answered the
two police positions would be 100% funded by the General Fund. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked
if there was enough money in the General Fund to fund the positions. Mr. Turley answered that is a policy
question; there is enough in ending fund balance without dipping into reserves.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the funding could be provided via the carryforward in Storm. Recognizing
that every department was making cuts, she said the Police Department was not a good area to cut. Mayor
Nelson clarified these were not cuts, they were frozen positions. Acting Chief Lawless said during the
budgetary process and recognizing the current economic situation, the Police Department was comfortable
and confident they could absorb the frozen positions based on staffing levels at the time of those discussions.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked Acting Chief Lawless if he was still comfortable with the positions
remaining frozen. Acting Chief Lawless answered there is one opening and with the announced retirements
at least four more in the first quarter of 2021. The plan was the two frozen positions would be absorbed
with two of the impending openings and as long as the positions were not eliminated, the frozen positions
could possibly be filled in the 2022 budget.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding of Acting Chief Lawless' explanation that the
Police Department had enough vacancies that the frozen positions will not impact staffing and even if the
positions were unfrozen, there would be vacancies through the hiring process for staff who are retiring.
Acting Chief Lawless explained vacancies impact staffing on the street, but it is something they have been
dealing with for some time. Vacancies will occur and if the positions remain frozen, it is two less positions
that are filled. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether he was comfortable with the positions
remaining frozen. Acting Chief Lawless answered the department can weather the storm of freezing these
two positions for a year.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there was a 3-6 month period for training once the positions were
unfrozen. Acting Chief Lawless answered the from an initial application with an entry-level applicant to a
completed hiring process, background check, etc. takes about two months. With the academy and field
training, from time of application to being on the road as a solo officer is generally 10-12 months.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for the motion particularly with the upcoming retirements.
Councilmember K. Johnson appreciated that Mayor Nelson put together a package to save money by
freezing various positions and that all the directors gave their best estimate. Knowing what she does about
the Police Department's needs, its essential function to the City, and the long time to gear up, she preferred
to unfreeze the positions and create the potential to fill them. If they are not filled, the City would not lose
any money, but if they are needed, they should be unfrozen. She encouraged the Council to support her
amendment.
Mayor Nelson asked Mr. Turley to explain the implications of freezing a position and what would be
required to unfreeze it. Mr, Turley answered freezing a position is different than a cut; a cut removes the
position, not only the funding but also the position. Freezing positions means essentially telling HR not to
fill the positions.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 31
Councilmember L. Johnson asked how the two SRO positions that the school district and community
decided to eliminate factor into the Police Department's staffing. Acting Chief Lawless answered only one
SRO position was eliminated this year. Another that was budgeted two years ago was cut from the Police
Department budget last year. That position was exchanged for the Crime Prevention and Community
Engagement officer position. Realizing there would not be an SRO, an effort was made to reinvigorate that
program that was lost in 2009. The position was funded in the 2020 budget but was never filled because
once the 2020 budget was approved, the Police Department needed to do legwork to get the position ready
to fill. Once COVID hit, there was a damper on that effort and that position has never been filled. In
discussions with Mayor Nelson and budget issues encountered early on, he froze that position and those
funds were used early in the COVID crisis when all departments sought to provide funding to assist with
that effort before reimbursements and grants came through. The other SRO, previously at Edmonds-
Woodway High School for a majority of the year, was reallocated and has transitioned to assist in the Police
Department's training unit, a long-standing need and will oversee the pending pilot program for body -worn
cameras.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS,
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE, AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
General
28 1 9 1 K Johnson Fund I Reduce Public Defender contract $ 37,930)
Mr. Turley explained the next four proposed amendments were included in the same decision package,
Non -Departmental. Every year adjustments are made to bring the balance more current. Mr. Turley read
Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: professional public defender services are not needed because we
have eliminated 40% of the public defender costs by excluding police charges for Driving With License
Suspended 3.
Councilmember Distelhorst said having worked closely on that project, it was his understanding the public
defender contract is self-correcting so if they do not receive more cases, the contract amount decreases. Mr.
Taraday agreed it was self-correcting; the contract contains a mechanism that counts the case referrals to
the public defender during the prior quarter and depending on the amount, compensation goes up or down
from the base compensation. If the changes that have been made with regard to Driving With License
Suspended 3 (DWLS3) result in a decrease in cases assigned to the public defender and if it is enough of a
decrease to trigger one of the thresholds (reduction in case count by 25), it would result in a downward
adjustment to the public defender. At this point it is unknown whether that will happen or not.
Councilmember K. Johnson said there was a flaw in going back a quarter because the City went from
including DWLS3 to stopping that. A press release from the Police Department stated they will stop issuing
those tickets and with no tickets, there are no prosecutions. The public defender indicated in their annual
report that this represents 40% of their workload so she recommended reducing the budgeted amount.
Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding that the public defender had a maximum caseload. She
was unsure if there was a similar limit for the city prosecutor. She preferred to look at this after the second
quarter, after the contracts have been considered and make adjustments once the impacts of the change with
the DWLS3 is known.
Mr. Taraday said the numbers in the prior quarter are absolute numbers; currently the base compensation
makes an assumption that there will be 150 case referrals to the public defender. If that number drops to
125, then the compensation goes down by a factor of 85.75%. If the case referrals drop to 100 in the quarter,
then the compensation drops to 71.75% of the base compensation and if the case referrals drop to 75, the
compensation would drop by 57.25%.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 32
Councilmember K. Johnson said that did not address her concern because there was a three month lag and
the decisions have already been made and there is no reason to increase by 40% if there is a 40% decrease
in the workload. Those cancel each other out and there should not be an increase in the budget.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO REDUCE PUBLIC DEFENDER CONTRACT IN THE
ABOUT OF $37,930. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
General
29 1 9 1 K Johnson Fund I Reduce "miscellaneous" adjustment $ 12,070
Councilmember K. Johnson said she did not know what miscellaneous meant; unless she could "see it,
touch it, feel it," she proposed eliminating it. Mr. Turley answered the miscellaneous account is
miscellaneous memberships across the City such as in professional organizations. Most of the memberships
in this decision package were provided by HR.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested if this was developed during non-COVID times, it may make sense
to consider staff's professional organization needs. She belongs to several professional organizations such
as AWC and they are unable to meet. She felt this was funding something that would not be needed in the
coming year. They can always be added but she did not like the idea of inflating the budget without knowing
what it is.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO REDUCE "MISCELLANEOUS" ADJUSTMENT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,070. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
General
30 1 9 1 K Johnson Fund I. Reduce prisoner care costs nnn_nnn�
Mr. Turley explained the decision package he submitted after talking with the Police Department was to
increase prisoner care costs by $100,000. In discussions since then, it was revealed the cost needed to be
increased by $400,000. In the changes proposed to the preliminary budget by staff, prisoner care costs were
increased by $300,000 to bring the cost up to the estimate for prisoner care costs. Councilmember K.
Johnson's proposal is to remove that adjustment.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she would defer to the Police Department and the Finance Department.
Councilmember K. Johnson withdrew the amendment.
General Remove funding for LEOFF Medical Insurance
31 1 9 1 K Johnson Fund I Reserve Fund 009 1 S (125.Onnl
Mr. Turley explained funds are transferred from the General Fund into the LEOFF Medical Insurance
Reserve Fund. This year's estimate was $125,000. Councilmember K. Johnson's proposed amendment is
to not make that transfer, thereby decreasing the General Fund expenditure by $125,000.
Councilmember K. Johnson withdrew the amendment.
General
32 1 8 1 K Johnson Fund I Restore the Crime Prevention Cost Center $133.657
Mr. Turley explained when positions were frozen in the Crime Prevention Cost Center, it was decided the
supplies and expenses could also be frozen. Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal is to restore the Crime
Prevention Cost Center.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 33
Councilmember K. Johnson withdrew the amendment as the frozen positions were not restored.
General Remove 0.25 FT-E Staff Support for the
33 1 18 1 K Johnson Fund I Edmonds Diversity Commission 1 $ (16,600)
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: The Diversity Commission was initiated with a
part-time consultant to get the commission started in 2015. They have had a paid consultant helping them
for five years. It is long past time that the commission members conduct the business of the Diversity
Commission. For 2021, the commission plans to have a DVD based film series, a small grant program and
another project that was planned during previous years. Not planned during COVID restrictions are the 4"'
of July parade, the World Cafe and the film series at the Edmonds Theater. The Diversity Commission is
staffed by Mr. Doherty, his assistant and a professional note taker and a consultant, four part-time staff
members. Compared to other boards and commissions, this is over -staffed. The most logical cut is
eliminating the consultant position at 20 hours/month.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
REMOVE 0.25 FTE STAFF SUPPORT FOR THE EDMONDS DIVERSITY COMMISSION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $16,600.
Councilmember Olson said she has heard about what the consultant has done and the value they bring. This
is an important conversation to have; while boards and commissions are great and the City is fortunate to
have volunteers who want to serve, each one costs the City money. She suggested Mr. Doherty weigh in on
whether this is the right time to wean the Diversity Commission from this support.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented the City had several outstanding boards and commissions and
some of them do all their work quietly and contribute a great deal. For example, the Cemetery Board does
the Walk Back in Time twice a year and the Memorial Day service and they have no consultant, and no
staff other than the cemetery sexton. She also serves on the Historic Preservation Commission and they
produce a historic calendar, brochures, preservation workshops, and the small number of commissioners
contribute a great deal of time. She was told Diversity Commissioners contribute five hours a month. By
comparison Arts Commission members contribute approximately 20 hours a month including their monthly
meeting, subcommittee meetings, coordination of public events, etc. She agreed a consultant was needed
to get the Diversity Commission going but it was time to pull the plug.
Mr. Doherty said the position increased from 10 hours/month to 20 hours/month which although not a lot
of time, it is great to have it. Diversity Commissioners attend commission meetings and subcommittees as
well as events (although not this year). There is a lot of work that someone focused on diversity, equity and
inclusion needs to do in association with the programs and issues the Diversity Commission discusses.
Without the consultant, that would fall to Megan Luttrell, the program coordinator, who does not
necessarily have the training or experience in that area or to himself which would be difficult to expect of
staff right now. Someone working five hours a month to conduct research on diversity, equity and inclusion
and helping to prepare programs and events is very valuable and staff would feel the loss if this consultant
were eliminated.
Council President Fraley-Monillas, an ex-officio member of the Diversity Commission, and one of the
founding members due to incidents that occurred in Edmonds, said the Diversity Commission is a different
group from any other board or commission she has participated in; they work on things that could have
great impact to the City. She was uncomfortable with removing the very part-time person in this role. She
preferred not to approve this amendment and suggested looking at it again next year. She appreciated
Councilmember K. Johnson's frustration, agreeing a tremendous amount of staff assist the Diversity
Commission, recalling Mr. Doherty said previously he spent 25% of his time working on Diversity
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 34
Commission issues. It is a better use of the City's funds to pay a contract staff person 20 hours/month versus
Mr. Doherty's time. She encouraged Councilmembers not to eliminate the funding this year and revisit it
next year.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he valued the volunteer and paid time that residents put into the Diversity
Commission. A specialized skill set is required to work in the area of diversity and equity. He had no interest
in reducing the funding.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of information, recalling two people said the hours were
increased from last year and asked the number of hours last year compared to this year. Mr. Doherty
responded it was about 10 hours/month until this year and now was 20 hours/month or approximately 5
hours/week.
Councilmember K. Johnson modified her budget proposal to return to the 10 hours/month, especially since
the World Cafe, 4"' of July parade and other project would not occur. Going back to 10 hours would still
provide the services and was more in keeping with the sentiments she heard during discussion
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
MODIFY THE BUDGET PROPOSAL TO RETURN TO 10 HOURS/MONTH.
Councilmember Olson said this was a move in the right direction and she hoped the Council would support
it. She referred to the $75,000 amendment that was approved and moved forward via DP # 1 which was also
related to equity and inclusion. She suggested that as a funding source if additional funds were needed.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed support for the work the Diversity Commission does and the staff
position to support their work. It is not without precedent that a commission has support staff, for example,
the Youth Commission has a coordinator who is staffed at 0.25.
Councilmember K. Johnson reminded her motion was changed from eliminating the position to funding it
at the previous years' 0.25.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented this is a very vital commission; commissioners serve on the
commission and subcommittees and do other things. For example, she and one member did the movie series
via Zoom. The commission is still doing their work and she encouraged the Council not to support the
amended motion and look at it again next year. There are many things the commission hasn't been able to
do such as working with downtown businesses on training.
Councilmember Paine said this position is required. A lot of extracurricular work is done outside the normal
hours by directors and staff in support of the City's various commissions. The Diversity Commission is a
key commission and very visible and puts out professional level work. She did not support the proposed
amendment.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she could not believe how much time the Council was spending on this and
everyone was saying the same thing. She preferred not to make drastic cuts now and evaluate it in the future.
Mr. Turley asked the dollar amount for the revised amendment. Councilmember K. Johnson answered it
would be 50% of the original amendment, $8,300.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON CALLED THE QUESTION. VOTE TO CALL THE
QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 35
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND OLSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, PAINE, AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
General Eliminate funding for gap analysis of the Comp
34 1 26 1 K Johnson I Fund I Plan Update 1 $(20,000)
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: the consultant is not needed for a gap analysis next
year in preparation for a 2024 Comprehensive Plan update. I have confidence that the City's Planning
Manager with decades of planning experience can adequately lead this preliminary planning analysis.
Councilmember K. Johnson said hiring a consultant to do a gap analysis for a plan that is not due until 2024
is unnecessary. Rob Chave has worked for the City for 33 years and probably could do the gap analysis in
his mind. Nobody knows the City better than the staff in the planning department. She preferred staff do
retreats and brainstorming because they have the knowledge. Hiring a consultant requires starting from zero
which she did not feel was a good use of consultant funds and would not be helpful.
Mayor Nelson suggested in the interest of time, Councihnembers not have staff read their rationale and
then restate the rationale. Councilmember K. Johnson said she asked Mr. Turley to read it because she
cannot read it herself. She was speaking to the motion. She will take Mayor Nelson's suggestion under
advisement and try not to do that.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR GAP ANALYSIS
OF THE COMP PLAN UPDATE IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF
A SECOND.
Eliminate funding for consultant for
General
Community Renewal Plan along Highway 99
35
27
K Johnson
Fund
Corridor
$ 60,000
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: I served on the Highway 99 subcommittee for
many years. This issue was discussed until the group was disbanded. Judge Coburn was part of those
discussions and as a result took the lead and created our community court specifically located in the
Highway 99 Corridor. I suggest reconvening a task force of staff to do this work or at least identify what
consultant services would be needed. The task force should include Councilmembers, Lighthouse Law
Group, the Police Department, Community Services Director, Building Inspector, Code Enforcement
Officer and the Development Services Director. They should do their work in 2021 and give a report to the
Council and Mayor as needed. If they recommend consultant services, it can be budgeted in 2022.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR CONSULTANT FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL PLAN ALONG HIGHWAY
99 CORRIDOR IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000.
Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged Council not to support the proposed amendment. Slowing
process on Highway 99 is the last thing the City needs to do.
Councilmember K. Johnson said Council President Fraley-Monillas was a member of the Highway 99 task
force and she shared her concern about the issues on Highway 99. Some of the things that were discussed
were code enforcement for abandoned houses or houses taken over by drugs or prostitution. The task force
talked extensively about ways to get rid of the crime element on Highway 99 and had a lot of half realized
ideas. She preferred to harvest the ideas raised in those discussions. She was not opposed to hiring a
consultant but preferred to reconvene the task force to identify what to move forward on.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 36
Council President Fraley-Monillas said a group of community members, City staff and she have been
meeting. This only $60,000 out of $170M project. She encouraged the Council not to support this
amendment.
Councilmember Olson said she was satisfied there has been enough committee action. She wanted to ensure
the community input helped direct the consultant project.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she was not aware there was a new group; she was not aware Council
President Fraley-Monillas had been meeting with citizens. She was baffled that the Council, especially her
who was previously involved in the task force, did not know that. She reiterated the need to get together
and talk about what to do before doing it. Mayor Nelson said he was not aware of a new group either.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she has given reports at Council meetings. The group has not met
often and has not met in several months but are due to meet again in January.
Councilmember L. Johnson raised a point of personal privilege, pointing out the Council was about to go
into the sixth hour of this meeting. She was dedicated to this process but the amount of time this would take
was her concern last week. She was struggling to stay engaged. She asked how many more amendments
there were and whether the Council wanted to consider stopping. Mr. Turley said after this one, there are
six left.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, suggesting this be the last vote and move onto Mayor
and Council comments. The Council should be able to take up the remaining items on Tuesday.
Councilmember L. Johnson encouraged the Council to work through the remaining items quickly and wrap
up.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he had tried to keep his comments to a minimum tonight and looked
forward to completing the remaining six proposed amendments. He suggested if Councilmembers already
know how they plan to vote, comments be limited and move quickly toward rationale and voting.
Council President Fraley-Monillas preferred not to postpone this to Tuesday because that agenda included
the CFP/CIP as well as other items.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON CALLED THE QUESTION. CALL FOR THE QUESTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING YES;
AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Cemetery
36 1 34 K Johnson Fund I Do not replace the Cemetery lawn mower
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: the replacement lawn mower costs $25,000. What
else could this money be used for to maintain the cemetery on an annual basis and how much is spent
annually on maintenance?
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO NOT REPLACE THE CEMETERY LAWN
MOWER IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
General
37 1 36 1 K Johnson I Fund I Eliminate funding for Pedestrian Task Force
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 37
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: there is no school planned for the foreseeable
future; therefore, we do not need a bicycle -pedestrian school safety program. If school is restored next
September, we could do a one-time budget adjustment to restore the program.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR PEDESTRIAN
TASK FORCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Eliminate funding for consultant to assess
1
condition of storm and sewer pipes to help
38
40
K Johnson
422 / 423
determine repair/replacement needs
$ 80,000
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: this work has always been done by existing staff
and has never been done by a consultant. I recommend we continue past practice and save the City $80,000.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if this decision package was proposed last year and voted down by
Council or was it something new. Mr. Williams answered it has been discussed, but not reached this point
before. This has been done inhouse in the past but requires significant staff time and effort. There is a
company that specializes in this that is very good and can assess the condition much faster than staff. He
was hopeful this could be tried as a pilot project and if it was successful, report to Council and discuss
whether to continue long term. Using a consultant would be very worthwhile and would save a great deal
of labor hours.
Councilmember K. Johnson said if staff is being paid to do the work anyway and they are doing all the
camera work, it makes sense for them to do the review. She said saving $80,000 is more important than
anything Mr. Williams said to justify spending $80,000. Mr. Williams offered to respond and
Councilmember K. Johnson declined his response.
Councilmember Olson recalled being in the audience last year when the Council discussed this and agreed
it was not something the City should do. It is tedious work that everyone hates and all the City departments
are lean and busy doing a great deal of other things. She supported hiring a consultant to do this work.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked to hear Mr. Williams' response. Mr. Williams said the City is never
caught up on maintenance and the extra labor hours could be invested back into the system. This would be
a trial project.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY , TO ELIMINATE
FUNDING FOR A CONSULTANT TO ASSESS CONDITION OF STORM AND SEWER PIPES TO
HELP DETERMINE REPAIR/REPLACEMENT NEEDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $80,000. UPON
ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING YES; AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
422 - Eliminate funding for Stormwater
39 1 42 1 K Johnson Storm Comprehensive Plan Update 1 $ (140,000)
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: defer the beginning of this project to 2022. It was
proposed to begin near the end of 2021 to be completed by winter 2022. I recommend the entire project be
deferred a couple months so it can be initiated and completed in 2022.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR STORMWATER
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,000. MOTION DIED FOR LACK
OF A SECOND.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 38
Add a "Legal Planner" position to
General Development Services to work on updating city
40
New
K Johnson
Fund codes and regulations
$ 87,072
Mr. Turley read Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: a new position legal planner, similar to senior
planner, mid -range $94,000/year. Justification is work is needed in order to update city codes and
regulations. Attempts in the past to update the code have been insignificant. We need to make this a priority.
Hire full-time staff and begin to make progress.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
ADD A "LEGAL PLANNER" POSITION TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO WORK ON
UPDATING CITY CODES AND REGULATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $87,072.
Councilmember Olson recalled this was discussed during an earlier decision package. She asked if
Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal was to add this to the $140,000 to make it the Cadillac package that
she recommended. Councilmember K. Johnson answered she was not aware of that proposal when she put
this proposal together. It is possible that Ms. Hope may choose to modify the job description. She viewed
it from a holistic standpoint as an ongoing process that needed one senior level and one regular level
planner.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING YES;
AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Mr. Turley advised Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale was identical to the previous proposed
amendment; this amendment is for an urban designer position for the same purpose.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO ADD AN "URBAN DESIGNER" POSITION TO
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO WORK ON UPDATING CITY CODES AND REGULATIONS IN
THE AMOUNT OF $87,072. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
The followiti proposed changes €f21 and #22 and were postponed during the above discussions:
Move $430,000 from Storm fund 422 to 017
21 62 Buckshnis 422 / 017 Marsh Fund for future Marsh work $430,000 $430.000
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled Mr. Turley's explanation that funds cannot be transferred from the
Storm fund.
Councilmember Buckshnis withdrew the amendment.
Remove funding for daylighting of Willow
22 62 1 K Johnson 422 / 017 1 Creek I 1441;0_00M I OVA nnm
Councilmember Buckshnis explained this amendment would remove the $450,000 carryforward and place
it in the General Fund for other Council initiatives that were approved today.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
REMOVE FUNDING FOR DAYLIGHTING OF WILLOW CREEK.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 39
Council President Fraley-Monillas did not understand the purpose of removing funding for Daylighting
Will Creek when there is still hope that it will be daylighted and why move it into the General Fund to
spend it on other things.
Mr. Turley reread Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale: I disagree the money should be spent to consider
another alternative for daylighting Willow Creek. We can only consider an alternative on City -owned
property. We know that the desired channel should be located on the Unocal portion of the Edmonds Marsh.
This is a marsh and the restoration should be a Parks project, not a Stormwater project. No time or money
should be wasted while the Unocal site is being cleaned. The fact of the matter is WSDOT has dropped the
multimodal project from their long range plans. It is no longer being considered as a capital project by
WSDOT. I recommend that the Parks department take over this project from the Public Works Department
where it resided until a change was made in the 2020 budget documents after Carrie Hite left the City. I
suggest we work to remove this project from the City's Comprehensive Plan. We should instead work with
state and local agencies to reimagine the long term use of the Edmonds Marsh. We should initiate a master
plan for the marsh and all lands located within the newly adopted FEMA 100-year floodplain including but
not limited to the following landowners: Unocal, WSDOT, Burlington Northern, and the Port of Edmonds.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked how the funds that came from Storm could be moved to the General
Fund. Mr. Turley explained the previous change proposed by Councilmember Buckshnis was to transfer
the money from Storm to the General Fund. This one is different, it proposes totally removing the finding.
The money does not go anywhere, the expenditure authority remains in the Storm Fund and less money is
set aside for the marsh.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained her general idea was this should not be a Storm project. Anything
allocated from Storm should remain in Storm, but the $430,000 greatly exceeds that. Ultimately it should
go into the Marsh Fund or the Parks Fund but her main point was to take it out of Storm.
Councilmember Olson expressed concern that the Council did not make the wrong decision due to the late
hour and being tired on something this important that the Council has spent a lot of time and effort talking
and thinking about. She did not want to move the money into the General Fund to be spent on just anything.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she did not attend the last half hour of the previous meeting although she
watched it. At that time Mr. Williams explained there was $130,000 that came from Storm that should be
spent on Storm projects. She did not know that when she wrote this proposed changed. She clarified any
money that came from stormwater ratepayers should remain in Storm, but the $430,000 is in excess of that.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked how much came from ratepayers and should remain in the Storm Fund.
Mr. Williams answered the 2021 budget proposes to carryover what was in the 2020 budget. All $450,000
are stormwater funds from ratepayers. He did not propose spending it, it was being set aside to show
progress on building up funding when the time comes to request grants.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON,
TO REMOVE $120,000 OF THIS FUNDING.
Councilmember Buckshnis explained the reason these funds were set aside in Storm last year was for the
grant. The grant went away due to ownership issues. The $450,000 would never have been set aside if there
had not been a grant. The PROS Plan is primarily related to the marsh and she suggested funding the PROS
Plan update with these funds.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 40
Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled discussion to move the funds from one department to another
and asked if the Council was getting into minutia that was not their responsibility. Mr. Taraday said there
was still a lot of confusion about what this money is. His understanding from Mr. Williams' explanation
was all the money was paid by stormwater ratepayers.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating it was a decision package from last year.
Mr. Taraday said it did not matter if it was a decision package from last year or four years ago, if it was
stormwater ratepayer money as Mr. Williams said, there was no other place this money could go but in the
Storm Fund. Council President Fraley-Monillas said that was her other question because she too heard Mr.
Williams say this was all stormwater funds. She asked if Council had the right to determine what
departments will be working on what, expressing concern the Council was overstepping its authority as the
legislative branch versus the administrative branch.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating the CFP/CIP was a separate budgetary tool and
this question was asked and answered at Tuesday's meeting.
Council President Fraley-Monillas requested Mr. Taraday be allowed to answer her question. Mr. Taraday
said it would be inappropriate for the Council to direct certain employees including directors to do certain
things; that is the Mayor's responsibility because staff works for him. However, if the question is how to
pay for certain projects and which funds to allocate for the payment of certain projects, that is fairly and
appropriately within the purview of the City Council provided that the City Council is legally limited in
that it cannot take ratepayer money and use it for General Fund purposes.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed what Mr. Turley stated earlier was incorrect, the funds could not be
moved to the General Fund. The Council can defund storm, sewer, etc. projects in the out years. She
reiterated this $450,000 was for a match; $250,000 was from Stormwater and $200,000 from the General
Fund. It remained even though the grant was pulled. As a Councilmember and in her oversight of the budget,
the Council has control over what is in the CFP and the CIP, that is their fiduciary role. If the assertion now
is that $450,000 is entirely utility funds, she stands corrected.
Councilmember K. Johnson paraphrased that Councilmember Buckshnis said $250,000 came from the
Stormwater Fund, paid by rate payers which she believe should go back to the Storm Utility Fund. However,
if $200,000 came from the General Fund to create a match for a grant, those funds should be moved back
to the General Fund.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED TO MOVE $200,000 FROM THIS DECISION
PACKAGE BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND FROM WHENCE IT CAME.
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested tabling this and looking into it. Mr. Turley said this money did not
come from the General Fund, it had never been in the General Fund, it was Storm ratepayer money. Because
it did not come from the General Fund, it should not go back to the General Fund.
Councilmember K. Johnson observed if all the money came from Storm it should go back to Storm.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
1421 - Do not fund Phase 12 of the Waterline
19 1 47 1 K Johnson Water I Replacement Program 1 $ 400,000
Mr. Turley explained the title of DP #47 is to fund Phase 12 of the Waterline Replacement Program.
Councilmember K. Johnson's proposal is to not do that. He reread Councilmember K. Johnson's rationale:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 41
this project would replace some of the water meters in the City. The total project cost would be $3.1 M over
multiple years. After the meters were replaced, then we would have to pay salaries, benefits, equipment and
vehicle charges in order to read the meters and create bimonthly bills. According to the City's climate
report, it was recommended the City replace the old-fashioned meters with new digital devices that could
be read remotely and could retire the need for meter readers in the field, trucks to read the meters and the
two utility clerks who must prepare bills every months.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she stands by her description but felt it did not match the decision package.
Mr. Williams said this decision package is design of the 2022 waterline replacement program and is not
related to meters. Councilmember K. Johnson said she supports the waterline replacement program. She
asked if there was a decision package related to meters. Mr. Williams advised replacement meters are
purchased each year. Councilmember K. Johnson recalled it was a decision package. Mr. Turley said lie
was unable to find a decision package related to meters. Mr. Williams said he did not remember a decision
package; there is a line in the operational budget to purchase meters each year. Councilmember K. Johnson
assured she had gotten this from the decision packages. Mr. Williams offered to research.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she also looked and was unable to find it.
Councilmember L. Johnson said DP #49 refers to existing water meter related to the hospital.
Councilmember K. Johnson said that was not it. Mr. Williams said that was replacing the large diameter
meter for Swedish Edmonds.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON,
TO MOVE THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO CONSENT AT TUESDAY'S MEETING.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the Consent Calendar is usually voted on before the action items and the
Council has yet to review the CFP/CIP so it would be inappropriate to put it on Consent and it should
instead be an action item following the CFP/CIP. Mr. Taraday said approval of the budget and CFP have
to occur at the same meeting but not in any particular order. If the budget is on Consent, it makes it more
likely that the Council will adopt the CFP/CIP on Tuesday. Approval of the budget could be pulled from
Consent if desired.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the CFP/CIP is a budgeting tool. If the Council does not know what
amendments will be made or what the discussion will be, the Council may need to redo the budget. She
preferred to do it in a logical order and it didn't make sense from an operational standpoint to approve the
budget on Consent prior to discussion on the CFP/CIP.
Councilmember Olson commented if it was an action item and there was no need for discussion, a motion
could be made and a vote taken. It takes time to take an item off of Consent and there is a good chance that
will happen. Mayor Nelson clarified the motion was to move the amendments that were approved tonight
to Consent on Tuesday. Councilmember Olson advised she found that acceptable.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
YOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson thanked Council for agreeing to meet in a special meeting to review these 41 amendments.
It does not make rational sense to do 41 amendments at one meeting but somehow the Council was able to
do it. He looked forward to the next meeting, hopefully the last meeting of the year and resolving any other
outstanding budgetary issues.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 42
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked Mr. Turley for all his work and staying on point as the Council
reviewed each amendment.
Councilmember Olson acknowledged it has been a difficult week for everyone. This seems like as good a
time as any to talk about dog poop; there is a lot of it around, even on sidewalks. She encouraged people,
for the sake of their neighbors to pick up after their dogs and recognizing that some dogs poop while
walking, she encouraging those owners to look behind them occasionally. Councilmember received an
email regarding this issue but it reminded her of what was occurring in her neighborhood. Pet waste is a
huge polluter and a health concern for the community and the environment.
Councilmember K. Johnson thanked Mayor Nelson for guiding the Council through this process and
keeping her on the straight and narrow, commenting he had done a stellar job. She also thanked Mr. Turley
who served as her eyes tonight because she cannot see and read all her justifications. She apologized if she
got overly excited but the budget is the most important thing the Council does every year. She appreciated
the creativity and imagination of items that people like Councilmembers L. Johnson and Paine brought
forward. She also thanked Councilmembers for sticking with this for six hours.
Councilmember Buckshnis said budget amendments are always a tedious process and was even more
interesting due to the amount of discussion, but it is good to have that discussion. She has looked up the
Stormwater stuff and will send it to Mr. Turley. She agreed this has been a tough week but she has gone
downtown two weeks in a row to shop local and the town is bustling. She has also gone to the Perrinville
Market on Sundays. The pandemic is still happening but there are some bright spots.
Councilmember Paine agreed this was quite a marathon. She thanked staff for attending meetings due to
the possibility of being asked questions. She thanked staff for their gift of time, apologizing that it was not
used as efficiently as it could have been and for giving up a Thursday evening. She expressed appreciation
for Mr. Turley's guidance and leadership.
Councilmember Distelhorst echoed serious thanks to staff, Mayor Nelson and Council colleagues, noting
there had been 10 hours of Council meetings within 52 hours of daytime. He thanked everyone for their
dedication and for working together to get this done. He wished those who were celebrating Hanukkah a
happy first night and urged them to stay safe as they celebrate. He announced his appointment of Brian
Doyle to the Tree Board. Mr. Doyle has 15 years of experience managing a landscaping company,
environmental conservation work through Earth Day Northwest and is part of Leadership Snohomish
County so he will bring great perspective to the Tree Board. His appointment will be on Consent on
Tuesday.
Councilmember Distelhorst reported, sadly, yesterday was the deadliest day in Washington State due to
COVID-19 where 49 fellow Washingtonians and over 3,000 people in the United States were lost in a single
day. He urged the public to please stay home if they can.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 43
ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:35 D.M.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 44
9. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
11 XHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLER
Edmonds City- Council Approved %WBUte>
December 10, 2020
Page 44
Public Comment for 12/10/20 Council Meeting:
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:22 AM
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 10, 2020 City Council meeting
Please:
1. Budget to compete a full Rewrite of the Code. Both the ECC and the ECDC have needed
updating for years.
2. Provide a status update of the Code Rewrite and explain what prior budgeted amounts
have accomplished.
3. Explain why hundreds of thousands of dollars previously budgeted have not resulted in
execution of the Code Rewrite.
4. Review the offices of Hearing Examiner and City Attorney before budgeting any public
funds for either position. I believe I have provided plenty of evidence that the Hearing
Examiner system does not work in Edmonds. History shows the City Attorneys and Staff
are willing to provide incomplete information to Hearing Examiners in front of Hearing
Examiner decisions. As for the Office of City Attorney, history shows City Attorneys are
willing to misrepresent law to City Council immediately in front of a City Council
vote. The March 17, 2009 Meeting Minutes disclose that Council was told that "an
intrusion into a right-of-way was not allowed and the City had the obligation to clear
it". All know that the City has no right to clear an UNOPENED right-of-way. The rights to
use the property are NOT ABSOLUTE, and the property owner has the right to use their
property while the City is not using its easement rights. Also lease do not forget the
imp-liedly joiningconcept created bv City Attorney Taraday weeks after a Conditional
Use Permit expired Null and Void.
Next, please make full public disclosure that Ordinances 4200 and 4201 failed to pass.
Neither City Council Motion included the following concept:
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon passage, as set
forth herein, as long as it is approved by a majority plus one of the entire membership of the
Council, as required by RCW 35A.12.130. If it is only approved by a majority of the Council, it will
take effect five days after passage and publication.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 45
One cannot throw things into an Ordinance different than the related Motion made. This
is very dangerous. Please put a stop to it at once.
I have personally been impacted by something similar. On March 17, 2009, City Council passed
an incomplete Ordinance. Council motioned to reserve an easement that had yet to be
defined. An Exhibit defining the easement was added to Ordinance 3729 AFTER Council's
vote. My family was greatly harmed by that Exhibit.
Please do the right thing and admit both Motions failed.
Thank you for your prompt attention to every point raised in this Public Comment.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 10, 2020
Page 46