Loading...
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