Loading...
08/03/2010 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES August 3, 2010 At 5:15 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding labor negotiation strategy and negotiations related to a real estate matter. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately one hour and forty -five minutes and would be held in the Police Training Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley - Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Scott Snyder, Human Resources Director Debi Humann, Community Services /Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 7:02 p.m. The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council Chambers, 250 5`h Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Cooper, Mayor Steve Bernheim, Council President D. J. Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley - Monillas, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services /Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Debi Humann, Human Resources Director Rob English, City Engineer Michael Clugston, Planner Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Plunkett requested Item D be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 27, 2010. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #120331 THROUGH #120457 DATED JULY 29, 2010 FOR $408,351.73. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 1 ITEM D: UPDATE ON PROGRESS OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS HEALTH BENEFITS COMMITTEE. Councilmember Plunkett explained the Health Benefits Committee is reviewing the upcoming change in employee health benefits. This item includes $21,000 to hire a consultant but does not indicate the source of those funds. Human Resources Director Debi Humann responded after discussion with Finance Director Lorenzo Hines, it was determined the $21,500 to hire Wells Fargo as the broker /consultant in the health insurance process would come from the Human Resources Professional Services' budget. That budget is currently at 50% and with position vacancies down, it is possible the budget will be under -spent enough to absorb that cost. The budget will be reviewed again in November and if required a budget amendment will be submitted requesting additional funds from the General Fund. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE ITEM D. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. COMMUNITY SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - CAR SHOW Chris Fleck, Treasurer, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and Chair of the Car Show, announced the 10'h annual Edmonds Classic Car Show on Sunday, September 12. The display of 300 -400 cars during the car show attracts thousands of people to the city. Downtown shops are open including restaurants, four of which have on- street dining. He acknowledged the car show did not directly generate funds other than to the Chamber via the participant fee. He assured the event was a great deal of fun and encouraged everyone to attend. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the Chamber Foundation, a 501(c)(3), allows people to donate to the Chamber. Mr. Fleck explained the car show is self - supporting but the Chamber appreciates all donations. The Chamber Foundation's greatest need is funds for the 4"' of July which is entirely funded by donations. 4. COMMUNITY SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: ADOPT -A -DOG Charles Greenberg explained Old Dog Haven cares for and finds homes for older dogs. He introduced Alvin, a 12 -year old, 7 -lb. Toy Poodle available for adoption at Old Dog Haven. Alvin is a very friendly, loving dog; his only health issue is a heart murmur that causes him to cough when excited. Mr. Greenburg invited anyone interested in adopting Alvin or another dog to call him at 425 - 774 -0138. Further information on dogs available for adoption is available at O1dDogHaven.org. 5. UPDATE FROM MIKE CARTER OF STEVENS HOSPITAL AND CAL KNIGHT OF SWEDISH HOSPITAL REGARDING THE HOSPITAL AFFILIATION AND HOSPITAL DISTRICT. Michael Carter, President and CEO, Stevens Hospital, commented on Stevens Hospital and Swedish's similar missions; both are not - for - profit organizations, both are secular, and their mission strategies are very similar. He displayed statistics regarding Stevens Hospital in 2010, summarizing Stevens has been growing consistently but slowly in the four years he has been there, they have high quality statistics in all measurable areas, have happy employees — employee satisfaction is now in the 84`" percentile nationally, stable operations, and are profitable — $15 million in net profit last year and slightly less in 2010. However, Stevens Hospital has a weak balance sheet, a poor brand image, and restless physicians. For those reasons, despite outward symbols of prosperity, Stevens Hospital did not think they had a future without a connection with another organization. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 2 Mr. Carter reviewed the process of developing a Strategic Plan which included involving the public and community leaders. The six pillars in the Plan (people, serve, quality- safety, finance, growth, community) all identify the need for a partner. For example, he pointed out affiliation will aid in recruitment and retention of physicians and employees, something that was becoming more difficult for Stevens. Cal Knight, President and Chief Operating Officer, Swedish, explained Swedish has two tertiary hospitals in downtown Seattle, a community hospital in Ballard, a new hospital under construction in Issaquah, and a relationship pending with Stevens. Swedish's philosophy about the future of healthcare is it needs to be provided in the communities where people live; their relationship with Stevens Hospital is consistent with that philosophy. Ideas in health reform and the future of healthcare that most everyone agrees on include the following, 1) scale matters — to provide the best healthcare to residents in a community requires a system with scale and scope, and 2) an electronic medical record is essential. He explained Swedish will install the EPIC electronic health record system at Stevens and begin its use in January 2012. EPIC is installed at Swedish and does exactly what it was expected to do — reduces errors, connects clinicians, and allows seamless monitoring of care across the system. EPIC, a very expensive system that Stevens would not be able to acquire and implement on its own, is one example of what Swedish will provide as part of the partnership. Mr. Knight described the free - standing emergency department and ambulatory center that has been in operation in Issaquah for the past five years. Mill Creek was identified as an area similarly underserved and a free - standing emergency department is being established in that area. Mr. Knight summarized the relationship between Stevens and Swedish will be good for the community, good for Stevens and Swedish as organizations and a great example of how the future of healthcare will be better with systems rather than independent organizations. Mr. Carter explained the Hospital District Commission considered all alternatives such as offering the hospital for sale, developing a joint venture with another organization in which a new company would be formed, and signing a management agreement to assist with hospital operations. The Commission chose an operating lease in which the Hospital District retains ownership of the hospital but leases the operations to a third party, in this case, Swedish. He described how the affiliation will work. Under the current structure Stevens Hospital and additional Stevens services are operated by Snohomish County Public Hospital District #2; and the three Swedish campuses, Swedish physician division and additional Swedish services are operated by Swedish Health Services. Under the new structure, Public Hospital District #2 will continue to own the hospital and lease the hospital operations to Swedish on a 30 -year term. Swedish will pay the District $600,000 a month in lease payments; payments escalate 3% per year and by year 15 will reach approximately $1 million/month and level off for the remaining 15 years of the lease. The lease has a 30 year term and two 10 year extensions are offered. One milestone remains, State approval of the Certificate of Need; a positive decision is expected on August 17. Beginning September 1, 2010 (if State regulatory approval is received) Swedish Health Services will begin to operate Stevens as a private hospital, begin making monthly payments to the District, and rename Stevens Swedish Edmonds. The Hospital District will continue to exist under a new name and receive Stevens' cash reserve of approximately $20 -23 million, $600,000 /month in lease payments from Swedish as well as $2 million/year via the M &O levy. The other $2 million capital levy will continue until it is paid off in March 2011. The District will establish a new office, he will go to work for Swedish, the District will hire a new Superintendent and Commissioners will form a business plan. He explained after September 1, 2010, the hospital's meetings will no longer be public. The Commission will continue to hold public meetings and will receive periodic reports on the hospital. A Strategic Collaboration Committee will also be formed in which both organizations work together. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 3 Mr. Carter explained the Commission retains several reserve powers under the agreement including that Swedish cannot change the hospital's location without the Commission's permission, and any product line that generates at least $3 million in net revenue (which covers nearly all product offerings) cannot be eliminated or reduced without the Commission's permission. Dr. Bruce Williams, Public Health Hospital District #2 Commissioner, explained Hospital District #2 was initially created to operate the hospital. Under the RCW, it has a much broader mandate for the health of the citizens of the District. He explained the benefit of a lease rather than a sale was that it maintained the commitment the community has made to the services offered by Stevens Hospital. If the hospital were sold, there would no longer be any control over retaining those services in the community. Via the affiliation, the District has leveraged the nominal contribution from the property owners in the District (the average home in the District contributes via the M &O approximately $25 /year per household) to a much larger amount that can be used to develop wellness and prevention programs. Those programs will include educational programs and recreational opportunities. He commented on Yost Pool as an example. Retaining the District also allows the Commission to have some influence via the Strategic Collaboration Committee. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether expansion at the Swedish Edmonds campus would require approval of the Commission. Mr. Carter answered that was completely within Swedish's control. There are several large projects pending due to Stevens' shortage of capital. Councilmember Wilson recalled the contentious Council meeting with Mr. Carter approximately two years ago. He was concerned at that time that Stevens Hospital was moving forward without a great deal of public input. He expressed appreciation for Stevens bringing in Howard Thomas, conducting town hall meetings, forming a stakeholder advisory committee and now touring area cities to describe the affiliation. He hoped Stevens agreed that his concern and the subsequent process resulted in a better product for the community. Councilmember Wilson commented the District was now in a position to do something tremendously innovative in terms of health care, in particular public health. He invited Dr. Williams to comment on the game changing nature of this new entity. Dr. Williams explained it is a direct mechanism for funding preventative health service, educational and interventional opportunities to help keep people out of the hospital. The District is open to all ideas such as bike helmets for kids, visiting nurse services for seniors, diabetes education programs, nutritional education programs, etc. The Commission plans to have public meetings to hear from the community what they want. For example, members of the public have already raised the issue of Yost Pool, bicycle lanes, fitness runs, etc. Mr. Knight explained this is a unique relationship that has not occurred elsewhere in the State of Washington. The district hospital law in Washington was originally passed so that hospitals could exist in places that otherwise could not afford a hospital such as rural areas. As a private, non - profit organization, Swedish feels strongly that a tax subsidy is not necessary to operate a hospital. For example, he compared Evergreen Hospital which has a large tax subsidy to Overlake Hospital which has none. Swedish's philosophy is if taxpayers are to be taxed for healthcare, the funds should be used for things those property owners would not otherwise have access to and that a traditional hospital cannot provide well. The result of this agreement is the best of both worlds — a private hospital with resources and know -how to provide medical services and a hospital district that is focused on healthcare in a new and different way to address some of the gaps. Mr. Carter agreed that a good process resulted from the two years spent reviewing the potential partnership with Swedish. The beauty of the agreement is that Swedish would have spent the $600,000 /month or more on debt service if they had purchased a hospital. The agreement keeps that money in the community. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 4 Councilmember Wilson noted the approximately $10 million/year in lease payments and the $20 million cash was a great deal of money but could quickly be spent on many things. He asked whether those funds would be used for asset acquisition, an endowment or used operationally on an annual basis. Dr. Williams agreed although it sounded like a great deal of money, it could easily be spent quickly in a number of different health arenas. The Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to the citizens to be as wise as possible and will take time to determine how the funds will be used. He noted the District will continue to have landlord issues for the hospital property and will retain a reserve for that. Councilmember Wilson recalled two years ago when this issue was presented to the Council, a resolution was passed that committed the Council to oppose any sale or transaction of this type. He planned to make a motion that the Council support this transaction/affiliation or could draft a resolution to that effect. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas thanked Stevens and Swedish for everything they have done for the community, commenting her family has used Stevens and Swedish for the past 50 years. She looked forward to a great future for the community. Mayor Cooper congratulated Stevens and Swedish for engaging in a process that resulted in a much better product. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RESOLVE TO SUPPORT THE AFFILIATION AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN STEVENS HOSPITAL AND THE SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2010 WATER SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. Public Works Director Phil Williams introduced Tom Lindberg, MSA, the consultant on the development of the Water Comprehensive Plan and Rob English, City Engineer. Mr. Williams explained since the Council's last consideration of the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan, staff met with Councilmember Petso to discuss her comments on the plan and subsequently made changes to the document. He highlighted two of the changes: • A concern was raised regarding the project list in the Plan that identified the order in which projects would be completed. Because there are many things that influence when a specific project is done such as receipt of grant funds, leveraging a private development project, or another City project, language in Chapters 7, 9 and 10 was modified to create more flexibility than the original draft appeared to allow. • The tables illustrating the results of the hydrologic modeling showed five out of hundreds in the system that have deficient fire flows. Detail was added to explain that many of the hydrants close to hydrants with deficient flows are well supplied with water and that in any fire event a number of hydrants would be used to fight the fire and nearly all have more than sufficient fire flow. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out there have only been two rate increases of less than 3% during the past 6 years; the draft Plan proposes increases of $0.08 and $0.075 to fund what should have been funded in the past. In the historical financial performance it appears the General Fund at some point was utilized to fund those deficits. She asked Mr. Williams to explain that General Fund monies were not used for the Water Utility. Mr. Williams assured there was no General Fund support/subsidy of the Water Utility. He explained in the past there were only two inflationary sized adjustments in water rates over a 5 -6 year period which results in an erosion of the fund balance. The update of the Plan considered that as well as the work facing the Water Utility. Edmonds, like many other cities, has not had an ongoing effort to replace its aging water infrastructure. A goal was established in this Plan to fund the annual replacement of approximately 1% of the lineal footage of the City's water mains. He acknowledged at 1% per year, it Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 5 will take 100 years to replace all the water lines, but it provided an ongoing funding source for that effort and requires a noticeable rate increase. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the fire hydrant revenue and asked if it was used to replenish the General Fund. Mr. William explained in Lane v. City of Seattle, a rate payer of the Seattle Public Utility sued the Utility for a charge on his bill for fire hydrants. Water Utilities have always viewed providing fire flow for the community as part of their responsibility. After a series of lower court rulings, the State Supreme Court ruled in Mr. Lane's favor that the provision of fire service was a general governmental responsibility and not the Utility's responsibility. The Seattle Public Utilities and the City of Seattle's approach to pay the cost of hydrant maintenance and other fire protection services was to raise the internal tax on the Water Utility to generate enough revenue to equal the amount they would need to pay to the Utility to provide those fire protection services. That funding method was also appealed and the Supreme Court ruled that was appropriate. In 2009 Edmonds raised the utility tax on the Water Utility by 8.7% to generate resources in the General Fund to pay the Water Utility to provide water - related fire protection services. This is reflected in the financials as hydrant revenue to the Utility. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that was the Intergovernmental services. Mr. Williams explained for the Edmonds Water Utility, the overall tax rate is 18.7 %; it was only the last 8.7% that was used to generate revenues for fire protection. The preexisting 10% plus the 8.7% equate to the total intergovernmental transfer, the total utility tax the Utility pays to the General Fund. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, explained his primary concern was the high cost, an approximately 65% increase over the next 10 years. Salaries make up 24% of the budget, averaging 6% /year increase, an amount he suggested be reduced. He pointed out although a portion of the City was 100 years old, much of the City was constructed in the last 30 -40 years and the water mains in the newer areas would not need to be replaced for a long time. He commented on the City's funding of water service under the double tracks being installed by BNSF and asked what happened to the money in the General Fund that used to pay for water mains. In a time when many citizens are having a difficult time, an increase in water rates can become overwhelming. He suggested the increases be more reasonable. Rebecca Wolfe, Edmonds, explained she participates on a national team, Carpe Diem Western Water & Climate Change. One of the things they are working on is to ensure municipal water supplies in the West have abundant and pure tap water for the future. As a result, many cities are updating their systems. She expressed her support for the Water System Comprehensive Plan and the rate increase to ensure water lines remained clear to allow citizens to "take back the tap" and stop using bottled water. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented on water leakage from aging pipes. He expressed his support for the Plan and the increase to replace water mains. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE 2010 WATER SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. MOTION CARRIED (6 -1), COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT VOTING NO. 7. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.65 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE RELATING TO THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE FUNCTIONS AND AUTHORITY OF THE DISTRICT TO INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIRTY -SEVEN (37) TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING STREET OVERLAYS TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF CITY STREETS CONSTRUCTION OF KEY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS TO RELIEVE CONGESTION TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES, CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING, SIGNALIZATION Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 6 INSTALLATION AND REPLACEMENT AND BICYCLE LOOP SIGNAGE WITH THE PROCEEDS OF A FORTY DOLLAR ($40) VEHICLE FEE INCREASE, IF APPROVED BY THE VOTERS. Public Works Director Phil Williams explained if passed, the proposed ordinance would expand the authorities of the existing Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (TBD) which the Council created in November 2008 under Ordinance 3707. The TBD's duties under that ordinance were limited to preservation and maintenance. The TBD Board implemented a $20 vehicle license fee that is collected at every vehicle license transaction for vehicles registered within the city limits of Edmonds which is contiguous with the boundaries of the TBD. The proposed ordinance would modify the TBD's authorities to authorize the TBD to seek voter approval of a $40 increase to the fee that will be used to fund a list of 37 projects identified in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Diane Talmadge, Edmonds, expressed concern that the proposed ordinance was extending the Council's own authorities which was not addressed in the explanatory statement in the voter's pamphlet. Although she supported allowing the voters to decide on the proposed 200% increase in the vehicle license fee, she disliked the tax because it extended beyond those who own homes to everyone who drove a car. She preferred the excise tax that taxed drivers based on the value of their car. She viewed this as a very regressive tax, noting levying a tax on homeowners was less regressive than a 200% increase in car tabs. To the argument that the increase equated to only a cup of coffee, she pointed out most residents had two cars. She summarized citizens were facing many increases including water rates and other State taxes and was concerned many citizens could not afford the $40 increase in addition to the existing $20 fee. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, recalled the Transportation Committee began with a proposal for a $70 fee that was later reduced to $40. He suggested establishing a fund for projects that come up and a committee to educate the public regarding the project list. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, supported vehicle owners paying a tax to pay for overlays and other repairs to extend the life of the streets because drivers use those facilities. However, the proposed list includes not only overlays but a list of 37 projects totaling $61 million. He objected to several projects on the list including the roundabout at Five Corners and several traffic signals including one at 91" & Caspers. He anticipated staff would have no incentive to apply for grants with a dedicated funding source from a license fee. Voters may have supported a proposed increase in the vehicle fee to fund the road system used by vehicles but likely would not support an increase that funded this extensive project list. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. To Ms. Talmadge's comment regarding the regressive nature of this fee, Councilmember Peterson pointed out it would fund improvements that would benefit the community, particularly projects that will improve safety around schools, allow students to walk to school and allow citizens to utilize alternate forms of transportation. With regard to Mr. Hertrich's comment that there would be no incentive to apply for grants, Mr. Williams explained the fee provides an ongoing source of revenue that can be used as matching funds for grants the City is able to obtain. Although the number and size of federal and state grants has diminished in recent years, there are still grants available and staff will continue to apply for grants to stretch the funds as much as possible. Staff will also seek to partner with utility projects, private development projects installing frontage improvements, etc. to complete as many of the projects as quickly as possible. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 7 Councilmember Petso commented no one spoke in favor of the proposed increase likely because, as many citizens have indicated, it is the wrong revenue source to fund the project list for a variety of reasons. Although some may view the transfer from the General Fund for roads and sidewalks a subsidy, she believed voters would be willing to spend some of their property tax revenue on streets and sidewalks. She did not support the proposed increase. Councilmember Wilson commented it was good public policy to tax cars because they create a public nuisance by the creation of carbon monoxide. He next referred to the regressive nature of the proposed fee increase versus the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) that was tied to the value of a car. He pointed out if voters approved the proposed fee increase, it would take over 60 years to fund the 37 projects on the list and none of the projects were prioritized. He preferred in these economic times to focus on a specific list of 4 -7 projects that would be completed in a short period of rime. He summarized it was a regressive tax with little accountability for elected officials. Although he supported taxing negative externalities of vehicles, this was not the right method. He opposed the proposed increase and pledged to campaign vigorously against it. He asked to be appointed to the committee writing the con statement for the voters' pamphlet. Councilmember Wilson concluded this was "fiddling while Rome burns." While the Council has been discussing a City Manager - Council form of government and placing this vehicle license fee on the ballot, the most important item to place on the ballot, a property tax levy to pay for basic City operations, has not been accomplished. Although the City has been discussing an operational levy for nearly two years, the Council has not been able to make a decision to place it on the August or November ballot. To place a levy on the February 2011 ballot will cost the City $115,000. To Councilmember Petso's comment that no one spoke in favor of the increase to the vehicle license fee, Council President Bernheim acknowledged it was difficult to rally citizens to speak in favor of a tax increase. By placing the measure on the ballot, the voters would have an opportunity to indicate whether or not they support the fee. He disagreed it was a regressive tax. As the owner of low cost, subcompact cars, under the old MEVT, he paid very little MVET whereas owners of heavy, expensive vehicles paid more tax. The regressive argument also did not apply because the increase was only $40 /year and taxed those who could already afford cars and insurance. The funds generated would not go into a "black hole," but would be used to fund specific transportation - related projects. If voters approved the fee increase, those projects will be constructed; if the voters do not approve the fee increase, the projects will not be built because there are no funds from any other source. With regard to Councilmember Wilson's comment that the projects were not prioritized, Council President Bernheim assured there would be an annual review process and projects would be prioritized year to year. He pointed out those who are opposed to the license fee have not suggested alternative funding sources. Although Councilmember Wilson suggested a reprioritization of the projects, his list contained the same projects. He invited voters to volunteer for the committees to write the pro and con statement for the voters' pamphlet. He expressed his support for the proposed fee increase. Councilmember Buckshnis voiced her support for the proposed fee increase, noting 21 of the 37 projects are walkways, safety or bicycles. She was willing to pay $6.66 /month for 2 cars, recalling during the Town Hall meetings that she and Councilmember Fraley - Monillas conducted, citizens repeatedly expressed interest in more walkways. If the voters approved the increase fee, the first eight projects on the project list were walkways. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas explained although she drove a 9 -year old car with 140,000 miles on it, the wear and tear on the road was the same as a new car. She agreed with Council President Bernheim's statement that people who cannot afford to pay insurance, buy gas, etc. don't drive cars. She found it Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 8 ironic that the Councilmembers who wanted to reprioritize the project list to add walkways and non - motorized projects were the ones who now did not support the fee. She asked how these projects would be funded if not by the proposed fee. She questioned whether Edmonds wanted to be a city where the roads were crumbling because its citizens were not willing to pay $3.33 /vehicle /month. She supported allowing the voters to decide. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3804 TO AMEND THE PROVISION OF CHAPTER 3.65 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE RELATING TO THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE FUNCTIONS AND AUTHORITY OF THE DISTRICT TO INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIRTY -SEVEN (37) TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING STREET OVERLAYS TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF CITY STREETS, CONSTRUCTION OF KEY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS TO RELIEVE CONGESTION, TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES, CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING, SIGNALIZATION INSTALLATION AND REPLACEMENT, AND BICYCLE LOOP SIGNAGE WITH THE PROCEEDS OF A FORTY DOLLAR ($40) VEHICLE FEE INCREASE, IF APPROVED BY THE VOTERS. Councilmember Wilson explained he opposed this when it came up as a policy vote in November 2009. Although he did suggest reprioritizing the projects, he was clearly opposed to the fee and intended to vote against it. The alternative is a levy. He recalled last April, 8 groups comprised of 65 people who participated in the Levy Review Committee, told the Council that the City needed more money in the form of a property tax levy. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas reiterated her support for allowing the voters to decide; whether they wanted to spend $3.33 /car /month, the cost of a coffee at Starbucks, or whether they wanted to go backward. Councilmember Peterson expressed his support for the motion, explaining if approved by the voters, the revenue generated by the fee would be used to fund projects and would not get lost in the "netherworld of the General Fund," an important concept to voters. He agreed a levy was needed to support the General Fund, those dollars are spent on a variety of governmental activities and are not as easy to pinpoint as the funds generated by a license fee. Similarly, revenue generated by the increase in water rates is used specifically for water - related projects. Approving a fee that is used for a specific purpose allows voters to track its use and does not allow funds to be used for day -to -day operations of the City. He summarized the projects on the list are tangible projects that are important to the livability of the City, the City's economy and have a greater good than the fee itself. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4 -3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY- MONILLAS, PETERSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, WILSON AND PLUNKETT VOTING NO. Mayor Cooper reminded that a meeting of the TBD Board to make a final decision regarding this issue will follow tonight's City Council meeting. 8. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING UPDATING THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED PERMANENT SIGNS PER SITE IN BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL ZONES. ( EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 20.60.025) (FILE NUMBER AMD20100014). Planner Mike Clugston reported the Planning Board has recommended for the Council's review and approval an important change in Chapter 20.60 of the Sign Code. The Sign Code contains numerous regulations regarding the size and location of signs as well as the maximum number of permitted signs on Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 9 a site. In the current code, a free standing business is allowed a total of three signs of whatever type is allowed in that area. For multi- tenant sites, each tenant is allowed one sign. Staff has received many requests from multi- tenant businesses asking for more flexibility. The Planning Board considered several alternatives and recommended that three signs per multi- tenant site be allowed, similar to a standalone business. All the existing requirements for size and location still apply. In addition, window signs are exempt from the total number of permitted signs. Window signs have their own requirements with regard to size and location. Mr. Clugston provided the proposed language for ECDC 20.60.025.A(4) regarding the maximum number of permitted permanent signs of three per site. The Planning Board determined the proposed change would allow multi- tenant sites throughout the City more flexibility. Council President Bernheim inquired about the rationale for exempting window signs. Mr. Clugston answered window signs have maximum area requirements, one square of window sign for each lineal foot of window frontage. Window signs are currently exempt from the maximum sign area, thus are already allowed the additional sign area. The way the code was previously written window signs were not excluded from the number of total signs. Council President Bernheim summarized the proposed change did not affect the maximum permitted area of window signs, only the distribution. Mr. Clugston agreed. For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Clugston referred to Chapter 20.60.035 that states the maximum area for window signs is one square foot for each lineal foot of window frontage. Councilmember Petso observed a business could do a one square foot sign all the way across their window. Mr. Clugston answered if a business had 20 feet of lineal window, they could put a 20 square foot sign in one window or spread it over multiple windows. The intent is to provide flexibility. Design standards in areas of the City would also apply such as the downtown business zones that state windows cannot be completely covered with signs. Councilmember Petso asked whether there were regulations regarding window signs in the Neighborhood Business zone. Mr. Clugston answered the same window requirements apply in the downtown business, neighborhood business and commercial zones. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, supported the City reviewing its sign regulations, recalling his inability to find the entrance to the new Ace Hardware and the manager's comment that they were not allowed additional signage. He found the proposed change helpful to businesses and customers which helped the City's economy. He also welcomed Mayor Cooper. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented he attends most Planning Board meetings and there is often a Planning Board representative at City Council meetings although there was not tonight. He suggested Councilmembers attend Planning Board meetings. He supported the proposed change. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, pointed out that previously the size of the building was used to determine the total square footage of allowed signage for a building including window signs. Under this proposal windows could be used for extra signage. Although window signs can be good, including window signs would allow a business a great deal of additional signage. He also felt filling windows with signs looked junky. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE SIGN CODE. Councilmember Peterson thanked the Planning Board and staff for developing the proposed changes. As a small business owner, the sign code can seem like a big deal when opening a new business and anything the City can do to assist small businesses is important. This was a step in the right direction to show the Council's support for the business community. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 10 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised the ordinance will be scheduled on the Council's next Consent Agenda. 9. PRESENTATION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO PROCEED WITH A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON GREEN FUTURES LAB FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT PLANS FOR THE FIVE CORNERS AND WESTGATE COMMERCIAL CENTERS. Planning Manager Rob Chave explained in March 2010 the Council adopted Resolution 1224 in response to recommendations from the Economic Development Commission (EDC). One of the Commission's recommendations was to initiate neighborhood center plans for Five Corners, Perrinville and Westgate in order to position these areas to attract redevelopment. In an effort to implement that recommendation, staff and the EDC's land use subcommittee worked with the University of Washington's Green Futures Lab and the Cascade Land Conservancy (CLC) to develop an 8 -9 month project at a substantial cost savings to the City. The project would involve University professors working with students and classes as well as utilize CLC, who by contract with the City, has 25 hours to provide. Mr. Chave explained the project is a public design process with the assistance of University students and CLC to develop regulations, design guidelines, etc. that would implement design and green development within the Five Corners and Westgate areas. This would position these areas for future improvement and redevelopment to provide services for the neighborhoods, improved access and potentially serve as a template that could be used in other neighborhood planning efforts in the City. With regard to funding, the base project is expected to cost approximately $40,000. There have been savings within the Planning Department's Professional Services budget such as money left over from the code rewrite that will not be spent this year and because development activity is down substantially, funds in professional services that would have been used for development studies will not be spent this year. This is a unique opportunity because, 1) the University of Washington can include this project in their curriculum this year, and 2) there are unlikely to be savings in professional services next year. The EDC land use subcommittee presented the proposal to the full EDC who unanimously recommended forwarding it to the Council. The University is ready to proceed upon approval by the Council. Mr. Chave explained although funding is available for the base study, the University recommends some type of market analysis accompany the study. The Council would need to identify funding for the market analysis. There are two levels of funding for a market study, 1) $25,000- $30,000 would provide a full market analysis for the two centers, or 2) $10,000 would be an expert looking over the shoulder of the university participants and CLC and providing expert advice on what was feasible. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the Council was being asked to approve a dollar amount for a market study. Mr. Chave answered yes, pointing out in the scope of work, the market analysis occurs in the early stages of the project, this fall. The Council could defer a decision on the market study for a few weeks. However, for the University to include this project in their curriculum, they need the Council to approve the project. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Chave for the assistance he has provided the EDC. As Council liaison to the EDC, Councilmember Buckshnis commented on the report given by the land use subcommittee regarding this project. She is also the liaison to the Port who is also utilizing UW students to do a similar project for Harbor Square. She was concerned with using the Council Contingency Fund Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 11 as a funding source for the market study, preferring to have it reconciled first. She supported proceeding with the partnership with the UW Futures Lab and CLC. Councilmember Peterson complimented the work done by Mr. Chave and the EDC, finding this an incredible opportunity for $40,000. Because the market is somewhat volatile at this time, he suggested it may be preferable to do the over -the- shoulder look and when the economy is more stable in 1 -2 years, conduct a more detailed market analysis. Mr. Chave answered that was one way to proceed. He supported at least having someone with some market analysis ability reviewing the concepts and providing an over - the- shoulder look. He recalled a Planning Board Member mentioned a similar concern with performing a detailed analysis at this time. He explained the type of market analysis that is done in support of a planning study was more long term and did not focus on existing development and current possibilities within a 1 -3 year period. Staff has heard that there are some property owners and developers interested in development at Five Corners and Westgate but their timeframe is unknown. For Councilmember Peterson, Mr. Chave explained the UW and CLC project would begin with fall quarter and extend into mid -2011. The University suggested in their scope of work doing the market analysis upfront during the fall prior to producing alternatives and discussions with the neighborhood. Councilmember Wilson advised approximately $25,000 /year is budgeted for the Council Contingency Fund. The purpose of that fund is for meetings the Council has, cookies for receptions, etc. In the past, any remaining balance went into a Council Contingency Reserve Fund. In recent years, the balance was added to the ending fund balance. He suggested if the Council wanted to fund a market analysis, it be funded from the ending fund balance. Councilmember Wilson pointed out this is a perfect example of redeveloping and reenergizing neighborhoods, fostering economic development and being collaborative. This project would be very inexpensive via the use of CLC and UW under -grad and graduate students - $15 /hour for graduate students was a great value. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO INITIATE THE NECESSARY AGREEMENTS WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON TO PROCEED ON THE STUDY, WITH FUNDING AS INDICATED. Councilmember Petso asked how this differed from what had already been done. She referred to the scope of work, examine existing condition in phase 1, gather public input in phase 2 and plan zoning changes in phase 3 and asked whether former Economic Development Director Jennifer Gerend had done this for Five Corners. Mr. Chave answered Ms. Gerend had done the initial public outreach and developed very general policy direction for Five Corners; however, it was never implemented. That process was not followed at Westgate. Councilmember Petso asked what would be different via this project. Mr. Chave answered much more detail. Councilmember Petso asked if it would simply be another study for the shelf. Mr. Chave answered the end result would be zoning proposals plus design guidance that could be adopted by Council. Councilmember Buckshnis added this project would also result in a template that could be used in other areas. The presentation made to the Port indicated the students would prepare 3 -1) figures, graphic models, etc. She summarized this was a wonderful opportunity for a partnership between the City, UW students and CLC. MOTION CARRIED (6 -1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO VOTING NO. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 12 Councilmember Wilson asked staff's recommendation with regard to the market analysis. Mr. Chave answered he wanted to see something in the way of market analysis. Either approach would be acceptable depending on what the Council feels it can afford. The main difference is a formal analysis with numbers, etc. via the higher level effort equates to more confidence. However, with the right team, value could be achieved from the lower level study. The Council could proceed as Councilmember Peterson suggested, doing a lower level study now, and a more detailed look in the future. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO REVIEW A COMPREHENSIVE MARKET FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000. Mayor Cooper inquired about the funding source. Councilmember Wilson answered the funding source was the ending fund balance. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the amount of the ending fund balance. Councilmember Wilson responded the Comprehensive Annual Finance Review projected the ending fund balance at yearend to be $1.2 million. Councilmember Petso commented she did not have enough background to support the motion. She was unclear about the scope of the project other than some hearings and one Councilmember is concern about the funding. Council President Bernheim pointed out the project scope was well described in the draft agreement. He was confident in the UW's and CLC's integrity in accomplishing the objectives. He was not concerned with paying $20,000 to an outstanding UW team of under - graduate and graduate students to develop a specific draft ordinance to accomplish the EDC's recommendations. However, with regard to the market study, he felt the City could afford a scaled -back study. He observed the market study would set the parameter for the students regarding the type of development that was feasible for the area. Mr. Chave agreed, noting there may be more than one option. Council President Bernheim did not support an extensive market study that cost $25,000 - $30,000. He preferred the $10,000 type of study where a person with some expertise assisted the UW students. Councilmember Buckshnis preferred to delay this decision for two weeks until the Council had an accounting with regard to the balance in the Council Contingency Fund. Councilmember Wilson offered to withdraw his motion and have staff identify the most appropriate funding source. Mr. Chave offered to confer with the UW to determine if they have a preference regarding the level of market analysis. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Mayor Cooper advised this would be scheduled on the Council's August 16 agenda. 10. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, explained last April she asked the Council to clarify a description that appeared in the ferry system's long range plan, an allowance of $26 million to enhance multimodal connections. Four months later, the City received a reply from the ferry system: the $26 million is a placeholder for unspecified future enhancements to multimodal connections at the existing facility. No specific projects have been scoped at this time. She did not find this response adequate or true, referring to a statement on a previous page in the long range plan that states, one improvement project is scheduled Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 13 to be completed at Edmonds in the 2029 -2031 biennium and will total $26 million. She anticipated that one project would be a second slip at the existing pier. She urged the City clarify that with the ferry system, pointing out a second slip would double the capacity of the existing terminal. She planned to continue speaking and writing until she got an answer to how the $26 million would be spent in Edmonds. Dave Page, Edmonds, welcomed Mayor Cooper. He recalled in the past the Council was non - partisan although there were often heated debates and many 4 -3 votes. He urged Councilmembers to abandon their personal agendas and work together. He recalled the enthusiasm when the Levy Review Committee subgroups made their reports to the Council, commenting that was the time to pass a levy. He urged the Council to place a levy on the ballot as soon as possible. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, reported on the successful toy drive at Top Foods July 9 -26, thanking the city for the Channel 21 and 39 coverage. He thanked Council President Bernheim for participating in the kick- off, noting there will be other toy drives in the future. With regard to the Stevens /Swedish presentation, he urged the public to attend the Hospital District meetings. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, recalled the City had been discussing the ferry system for the past 20 years. Although he enjoyed sitting on the beach and watching the ferries, he did not like the ferry traffic and the disruption it caused. He preferred to have the ferry terminal relocated to allow the City to reclaim the mid - waterfront area and ferry lane. He agreed with Ms. Shippen that the ferry system worked in strange and mysterious ways but they usually had a plan, particularly for $26 million. He referred to the two slips in Kingston that occupy the entire waterfront. He referred to the "Four No's" developed when he was Councilmember that stated the Council's opposition to a second slip. A second slip is undesirable because the ferry system will park a ferry there overnight, a 60 -foot tall structure that will block views. Because the railroad tracks would be impassable with double tracks, he envisioned the ferry system constructing a large dock on the water side to house ferry holding lanes. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, a member of the EDC, thanked the Council for moving forward with their proposal. He explained there are a lot of volunteers on the EDC working hard to pursue good ideas and plan to present additional proposals in the future. Speaking personally, he supported the Council's decision to delay a decision on the marketing study. The delay would allow the Council to determine whether there were alternate funding sources to fund the marketing study. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Cooper welcomed a Boy Scout who was in the audience working on his Communications Merit Badge. Mayor Cooper informed the Council that the Hearing Examiner, City Attorney and Prosecuting Attorney's contracts expire at the end of 2010. He invited Councilmembers to inform staff if they were interested in doing RFQs for those contracts. Mayor Cooper reported Snohomish County and the FAA have decided to move forward with additional study of commercial passenger air at Paine Field. He assured he will continue to communicate the City's position. Given the interest in this year's budget, Mayor Cooper announced the budget review committee will include all seven Councilmembers. He planned to schedule a special meeting on a Saturday morning in late August to allow the Council to review staff's proposal. He would then use the Council's input to prepare a budget. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 14 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Wilson commented last week he thanked Council President Bernheim for his leadership during the interim mayoral period. He relayed his and the Council's appreciation for City staff, particularly the directors who bear the brunt of long Council meetings. He expressed appreciation for staff doing what was right, working hard and staying loyal to the community. To Mr. Page, Councilmember Wilson assured he had not tried to put a bunch of democrats on the Council. Although there have been comments to the contrary, he assured he was a democrat. He thanked Mr. Hertrich for his concern about a 60 -foot ferry occupying a second slip and blocking views from midnight to 4:00 a.m. To Ms. Shippen, he pointed out she had received an answer from the Department of Transportation that the $26 million was a placeholder. He suggested she not expect any Council action strengthening the City's position opposing a second slip. Councilmember Peterson echoed Councilmember Wilson's comments about staff, especially the way staff works with citizen volunteers whether it is the Transportation Committee, the EDC, the Chamber of Commerce or the Floretum Garden Club. These organizations care about the City and one of the reasons staff works closely with those groups was because they also care about the City. He urged citizens to acknowledge City staff. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas assured staff they were not spinning their wheels and the Council heard their concerns. Councilmember Petso echoed the praise for staff, particularly the Public Works Director's heroic effort in meeting with her for nearly two hours on one of his first days on the job. She was impressed with what they had accomplished. She thanked Mr. Hertrich and Ms. Shippen for their public comment. She appreciated Mr. Hertrich history of the ferry system and said Ms. Shippen is entitled to ask how the ferry system plans to spend $26 million. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for their assistance with developing information for the Levy Committee. She explained the Levy Committee is working on a comprehensive way of looking at the budget and helping the public understand the process. Several presentations will be made to the Levy Committee; at the last meeting, one of the members who is a CPA gave a presentation on the difference between governmental accounting standards and financial accounting standards. The Committee's next meeting is Monday, August 9 at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room. Council President Bernheim observed the gardens throughout the City look outstanding. He echoed the appreciation of staff and thanked Mayor Cooper for inviting the Councilmembers to participate in the budget process. He also thanked Mayor Cooper for the notice regarding expiration of the Hearing Examiner and City Attorney contracts. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:38 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2010 Page 15