cmd080321EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
August 3, 2021
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Susan Paine, Council President
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brook Roberts, Student Representative
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human
Services Director
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Tom Brubaker, City Attorney's Office
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember L. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledge 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.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO
AMEND THE AGENDA TO ADD AN ITEM TO PAUSE THE BIAS AND HATE REPORTING
PORTAL.
Councilmember Olson said she would like to pause it until full vetting and legal analysis is conducted.
There were a number of valid points made in the last 1-2 weeks and she had concerns with the unintended
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 1
consequences and liabilities for the City and would like to protect the City from those in the short term they
can be looked into by legal and further vetted by the Administration and Council.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if vetting had already occurred and if so, would this be duplicative. In
response to City Attorney Tom Brubaker's request for her to repeat the question, Councilmember L.
Johnson explained the Council is being asked to consider this tonight so there will be an opportunity for
legal vetting to occur. She was asking whether that had already occurred and would this be duplicating
those efforts. Mr. Brubaker answered some legal research has been done but more could be accomplished
to determine any issues that might arises. In his opinion the Mayor has the authority to enact this reporting
function as the chief administrator of the City. It is open to the Council to discuss and consider policies
behind that. The motion is to add an item to the agenda to pause the operation of the hate/bias weblink.
Councilmember Olson said the motion was to amend the agenda to add the item for discussion and possible
action. Mr. Brubaker clarified the item before the Council is whether to add this item to the agenda and if
approved, it can be discuss in more depth later on the agenda.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND HAVE PLACED AS ITEM 8.5 AND NOT 8.1.
Councilmember Olson said she will vote against the amendment as this item is time critical.
Council President Paine said she would only support the motion if it was Item 8.5 as there were plenty of
other time sensitive items on the agenda.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES;
AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING NO.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON VOTING
YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND THE MOTION TO MOVE NEW BUSINESS ITEM 8.1, LANDMARK TREE ORDINANCE
EXTENSION, TO UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM 7.2.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the Landmark Tree Ordinance Extension was not New Business so it was
appropriate to be under Unfinished Business.
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson described the procedures for in -person and virtual audience comments.
Willie Russell, PCO for 2111 LD Cascade Precinct 3, said he has been listening to comments about the
City's hate portal and wanted to inform the Council that they do not understand what a hate portal is. He
read a hate portal from the 32" d Democratic page written on September 9"' by Councilmember Susan Paine,
the horrible person has extensive criminal history, over 50 criminal convictions, many convictions including
rape, kidnapping and threatening a judge, plus anti -harassment. Mr. Russell said none of those were true,
he could prove it in a court of law but never got a chance to and it was a hate crime. He has 747 cases; the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 2
hate crimes are in the courts, people who are allowed to commit perjury. The judge got a restraining order,
dismissed it while he was a candidate keeping him from campaigning. He has asked for a year for someone
to look into this; the Police Department won't investigate. The Police Department came to his house, saying
an arrest warrant was in process and that they had talked to the District Attorney and the City Attorney and
there was no crime. The police came to his house at 11 p.m. and woke the neighborhood. He referred to
information he obtained via public disclosure that stated, we redact this information collected by the
Edmonds Police, it would reveal strategy on how gang warrants are served at gang addresses When this got
out, MS 13 came to his house; he lives in a Mexican community, and danger occurred at his home because
Councilmember Paine brought it. The reason was because he told her to bugger off in an LD page because
he submitted an article to Gold Bar Reporter about people she worked with. The hate is in the Police
Department and Court. Then she went to court to get an extension; in civil matters, someone is either a
plaintiff or a respondent. She got a restraining order and never allowed him the opportunity to defend his
character, character he got serving in the United States Army and in Vietnam. He concluded the judge said
defendant not respondent.
Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, commented on the Edmonds tree ordinance. She commended the Council
for wanting to retain trees in Edmonds and asked for it to be done legally. Trees are beautiful and are the
reason they bought their property. She reminded Councilmembers that trees belong to the property owners
they are growing on. Councilmembers have created laws dictating what property owners do with their own
trees and requiring 100% compensation for the trees' worth if removed. Edmonds is assuming ownership
of private property without compensation. Not only has the Council taken away their rights and the worth
of their trees without compensation and charging them for 100% the worth of their trees, but it is also
against the U.S. Constitution's 5' and 14t' amendments' takings clause, against the Washington State
GNU, and against the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. There are trees on the only buildable area of their
property and sadly they and their roots will have to be removed at a high cost.
Ms. Ferkingstad continued, Edmonds planning regulations require a 30% retention to divide their 1.2 acres
to build 3 homes for themselves and their family. If they cannot retain 50% of the trees on their property,
the Edmonds tree ordinance will tax them nearly $250,000 before the trees are removed. Retaining 50% of
the trees will be difficult when the buildable areas are where trees are grouped together. Most likely they
will have to retain trees very close to the homes, potentially damaging the trees and limiting available
sunlight and potential views of Puget Sound in order to save on the 100% tree ordinance tax. Edmonds'
tree ordinance places an undue burden on those wishing to build single family homes on residentially zoned
property in Edmonds. For the City to avoid facing litigation, she pleaded with the Council to retain trees
legally like the Town of Woodway had to do after they faced litigation when they tried to limit private
property rights, and purchase properties that have trees the City would like to retain. She requested the
Council stand up for citizens' rights to their property and not penalize those trying to build needed homes
in Edmonds. She thanked the Council for their good intentions, asking only that they follow through with
them after they have been legally vetted. She thanked the Council for the work they do for the City and
requested they stand up for individuals' rights.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on trees and public process. She was happy the City has expressed
intent to undertake public outreach, an extremely needed step for regulatory processes and one that has been
thus far missing from updates to the tree code. She hoped the Council would include in this process the
development code and amendments that bypass the Planning Board and were solely deliberated in closed
Council session and the tree list created by City staff and the Tree Board. The impetus for the tree
maintenance regulations was the development code process and outcomes. The tree funding mechanism
and retention requirements create a strong disincentive for property owners to maintain trees and thereby
drove the City to this regulatory effort. Outreach should include these portions of the development code for
public review and comment so any resulting code can function holistically. This would also provide the
City the opportunity to evaluate land use impacts of the code and gain comprehensive and durable SEPA
coverage for the entire tree code. With regard to the tree list, it should be created by those who have an
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 3
arborist or public safety background in consideration of climate change to identify the right types of trees
that will be in the right place for the changing climate. Extending the emergency ordinance is not a
requirement to undertake the robust public process. It is contrived and indicative of the complete lack of
trust the City has in property owners who maintain trees.
Ms. Seitz said she will continue to advocate for the City to form a partnership with treed property owners
and state emergent facts to support the use of an emergency ordinance. Outreach for this effort should be
specifically targeted to areas where large trees are growing which can easily be identified from the 2017
urban canopy assessment. The City needs to think beyond what trees are here today; there is no reason this
burden cannot incentivized, undertaken as public infrastructure or shared by all property owners. The Bowl
contains at most around 1/3 of Edmonds residents. As the Council moves forward with considering trees
and growth and all other contentious issues, she reminded they are required to consider all residents in their
decision -making, to consider the aesthetic beauty of trees and not just the unique charm of downtown,
consider where resources are needed and not just where they have been spent, consider those residents who
through disenfranchisement language or other barriers are silent and make extra efforts to engage. In her
experience, underserved communities have opinions and views about what they would like to see, they just
don't think their opinion will matter. The Council will need to work hard to change that perception with
their actions.
Liz Brown, an agent for Teamsters Local 763, the union that represents the City's Parks and Public Works
employees, spoke in support of Item 8.4, reinstating the emergency sick leave for employees. This
emergency sick leave touches on an issue of equity with regard to the pandemic. Most of the City's white
collar administrative employees have been allowed to telework from remote locations during the pandemic.
Employees have worked remotely during periods of quarantine because of potential COVID exposures
without having to use sick leave. Recently several members were sent home for COVID testing and
quarantine because of positive COVID exposures at work and told they would have to use their own sick
leave. The pandemic has fallen hard on all essential employees, from Local 763 members to grocery
workers to police officers and firefighters. There is an inherent inequity between employees who can work
from home and those who can't. She requested the Council reinstate the emergency sick leave so members
can be treated in an equitable manner along with the City's administrative staff.
Jenna Nand, Edmonds, read a letter addressed to the City Council about abuse of the bias portal. She
found a letter to the editor written by Matt Richardson in which he fictitiously called her a victim of bias
due to her participation in the 2019 Edmonds City Council appointment process. Due to this facetious victim
of bias complaint, her name is now publicly discoverable as someone who is supposedly a victim of bias in
Edmonds because of her race and gender without her consent. Clearly Matt Richardson is treating the portal
as a joke and she did not appreciate being the butt of someone else's political joke. She requested the
Council consider the following: Are these complaints publicly available through litigation? How can you
protect the identities of people who do not consent to be named in the complaints as victims? Why are
unrelated, third parties permitted to make complaints and name so-called victims of bias without their
knowledge and consent? Is there an appeals process so her name can be redacted from Matt Richardson's
complaint or have his complaint stricken from public record? How can she protect her personal and
professional reputation if she is named as a victim of racism or a victim of bias inappropriately or facetiously
on the internet and in the media? She was deeply disturbed by this development and felt the portal had been
used to victimize her as a woman of color in Edmonds. As an attorney, she felt the present process was very
ill advised and needed to be amended immediately to prevent abuse and mistreatment of people of color in
Edmonds by means of facetious reports of victimhood.
Finis Tupper, Edmonds, commented the Council will be reviewing the Council Code of Conduct and
Rules of Procedure tonight. He referred to something that occurred in 2019, acknowledging that three
Councilmembers were not on the Council at that time. An ordinance was passed that applied only to
Edmonds boards and commissions in response to the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). In reviewing the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 4
Rules of Procedure, there is mention about OPMA but nothing about Council being required upon election
or appointment to take OPMA training from the Attorney General or other approved program such as
MSRC and AWC within 90 days of taking office. He questioned why that was left out when it is clear that
the Council does not understand that all special meetings need to be open to the public. He referred to an
ordinance passed on November 19, 2019 when Mike Nelson was a Councilmember and he voted in favor
of the ordinance when Dave Earling was the Mayor. The ordinance wasn't published and did not go into
effect until sometime in January. He supported following City and State laws, noting there is a law that
states if an ordinance isn't published within 15 days, the Council is to be notified which was not done;
Mayor Nelson signed the ordinance.
Cindy [last name not given] thanked Councilmember Olson for her comments and suggestion regarding
the portal. Tonight, two people have relayed serious issues with the portal. The portal is actually a violation
to the constitutional right to privacy, freedom of speech and as the radio host Dori Monson said, there is no
one that is not biased about something. Knowing that the portal violates the right to privacy, she did not
understand the hesitation to remove it. The portal will incite problems and will not be good for the City.
Edmonds is being held up as a racist community because to quote Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, "we
have to deal with all the racism in Edmonds." She was unaware there was so much racism in Edmonds until
someone told her and she happens to be a woman of color. The fact that Councilmembers are not taking
this more seriously and immediately goes to show the disregard the Council and the Mayor have toward
the will of the people. The portal obviously violates many people's rights and is very communistic. If the
goal is to incite hatred amongst and between people and get them infighting, apparently the game is to
divide and conquer. The Council is trying to make Edmonds become Seattle and she hoped people who are
listening will agree Edmonds does not want to become Seattle; Seattle has been destroyed and has lost
millions due to what has been allowed to happen. The Council is just perpetuating the destruction that is
already evident in Seattle. She hoped the Council would rethink what they were doing and start listening to
their constituents.
Beth Fleming, Edmonds, shared her disappointment in Councilmembers Distelhorst and Fraley-Monillas'
choices at the conclusion of last week Council meeting. She thank Councilmembers K. Johnson, Buckshnis,
and Olson and Council President Paine for their acknowledgement and thoughtful consideration of the
citizens' concern and feedback that was provided at last week's meeting. The role of an elected official is
to listen to all their constituents, whether or not they agree with their point of view. Last week
Councilmember Distelhorst chose not to acknowledge the concerns he heard from citizens regarding any
of the topics discussed, at least not the portal. She found that particularly puzzling and concerning given
his role in launching the portal. It was a missed opportunity to show he actually cares about all the citizens
he was elected to serve. Even more egregious behavior came from Councilmember Fraley-Monillas when
she acknowledged the commentary and chose to accuse citizens of being bullies and political operatives
who were only sharing their feedback as part of an organized effort.
Ms. Fleming said she attended last week's meeting from beginning to end and listened to all the comments;
some were more passionate in their delivery, perhaps a few stepped on a line of professionalism but there
was no bullying. While Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' response was offensive and disappointing on so
many levels, it was not surprising. She betrayed her position as a Councilmember by belittling and casting
accusations at citizens she represents which Ms. Fleming found despicable and disappointing and was her
own version of bullying those who have a different opinion or ideology than her own. She chose to defend
her words in an Edmonds Beacon interview and rather than being forthright about it, she actually
misrepresented what she actually said in the interview, with all the racism in Edmonds. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas also referenced a Indivisible Edmonds Facebook page and a conversation among people
on that group about starting a list of all the people were signing a petition for Mayor Nelson to resign
because of the complete mishandling of the chief of police hiring process. They mentioned people by name
and profession, claiming their businesses would be boycotted as a result; Councilmember Fraley-Monillas'
response was "seriously, no surprises with that pack of downtown rich white people." There was no way to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 5
take that out of context; Councilmember Fraley-Monillas showed her true colors, a completely biased
comment for a Councilmember to have made. Ms. Fleming said she was a member of that Facebook page
for five years and was removed after trying to explain why people felt the way they did regarding the chief
of police issue. It is shameful behavior and unbecoming of an elected officials and let's not forget this in
November.
6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 27, 2021
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
3. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ALLEN, JULIA
4. BOARD/COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. RESOLUTION ADOPTING COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
Main Motion
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO
APPROVE THE COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE.
Amendment #1
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO AMEND BY CHANGING 3.2.A AS REFLECTED IN
THE DOCUMENT SHE DISTRIBUTED, TO READ, "MAJORITY VOTE OR CONSENSUS OF
THE COUN THE RE UEST OF THREE OR MORE COUNCILMEMBERS."
Councilmember Olson explained 3.2 lists requirements for placing items on the agenda. She was proposing
this change because in her experience something has to already in effect be voted on to even have a
discussion on it. Changing the requirement from four to three would in effective give the minority a voice.
She recognized at some point it was possible she would be part of a majority and she would still want the
minority to be heard on issues that were important to them and the citizens they represent.
Councilmember Olson suggested the paragraph below 3.2.13 be revised to read, "The Council President will
make every effort to place the councilmembers requested items in B. 2-4 above
on an agenda. If time is not available for the requested date, it shall be placed
on the next available agenda."
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she understood the reason behind it but had concern with not
requiring a majority of Councilmembers to put something on an agenda, sometimes at the spur of the
moment which has happened a lot this year. Having a majority vote by Council is more diplomatically
correct than a minority vote. She asked if there were two separate amendments. Mayor Nelson suggested
that would be most helpful.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was unsure the proposed amendment was an appropriate way to put things
on an agenda. As Council President for three years, she realized how frustrating it can be for
Councilmembers trying to get things on the agenda, but the Council President is who determines the order
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 6
or sequence of an agenda. A majority of Councilmembers can always change an agenda so she felt a
majority should be required and not just three or more Councilmembers.
Councilmember Buckshnis said anyone watching during the last two years has noticed the frustration of
the 4-3 vote when a Councilmember wants to put something on the agenda and the Council spends 10-15
minutes bickering instead of putting an item on the agenda. For example, a decision was made not to put
the March quarterly on the agenda, when it has been the citizens' wish to see the quarterly financial report.
During the last couple of years the Council President seems to be using their authority instead of listening
to the will of the committees or individual Councilmembers. She cited the reimbursement of
Councilmember Olson as another example; she spent approximately 2,000 hours working on that over two
years to get it on the agenda. It was actually a Council oversight issue that she will bring up in the
reimbursement section. Due to the 4-3 voting, a lot of things are on the agenda that shouldn't be such as the
Taste of Edmonds contract which has always been on the Consent Agenda.
Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers keep their comments to the topic at hand. Councilmember
Buckshnis expressed her support for the amendment based on what she has seen the last couple of years,
pointing out Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was allowed to provide a long explanation and she was doing
the same and providing examples.
Councilmember K. Johnson attempted to speak to the second amendment.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised point of order, stating since the Council was taking these one at a
time, it was only appropriate to speak to the first amendment.
Council President Paine asked if this was in compliance with Robert's Rules of Order. City Attorney Tom
Brubaker answered Robert's Rules is generally designed to allow the majority to prevail and give the
minority a voice. This is the Edmonds City Council's internal rules of procedure. Just as the Council adopts
Robert's Rules, the Council can also modify them. The question before the Council is whether they want a
minority of the Council to impact setting the agenda. Council President Paine concluded there was latitude
within Robert's Rules. Mr. Brubaker agreed.
Councilmember Olson commented this is the only place she was interested in changing a majority of 4 to
3. The Council President and the Council President Pro Tern are elected by a majority and it takes a Council
majority to get anything on the agenda. In her experience during the past one year seven months and several
worthwhile items suggested as agenda items, none of which have been put on the agenda, she felt like she
was blocked. Therefore, all the citizens and residents she represents and that elected her have been blocked
in effect as well. She encouraged the Council to support this change as it is imperative that it happen.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas began to explain the reason she supports requiring a majority vote.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, asking whether Councilmembers who have not spoken
yet should be allowed to speak before Councilmembers who already spoke. Mayor Nelson agreed.
Councilmember K. Johnson said 3.2.A requires a majority vote to get something on agenda. She has tried
four times to get an item on an agenda this year and it has been blocked each time by the Council President
although she did not believe a vote was taken amongst Councilmembers, and the Council President
substituted her personal judgment.
Council President Paine raised a point of order, requesting Councilmembers speak to the motion. Mayor
Nelson ruled point taken and required Councilmembers speak to the motion and not make personal remarks.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 7
Councilmember K. Johnson said the problem she has experienced is similar to Councilmember Olson's
experience, she has been unable to get something on the agenda and there is no mechanism available to her
to get it on the agenda. The idea that a majority vote or consensus of the Council simply does not work
because there is no process for doing that.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled 2'/z years ago most votes were 5-2 or 4-3; she was on the minority
side most of that year, but that is the process. She understood feeling blocked or that it was not democracy
but she also understood policy and procedure. The same thing happens in the State Legislature, Congress,
County Council, etc., that is the process to get something on agenda. It requires calling Councilmembers to
explain the reasons for putting something on the agenda. She was on that side for nearly 2 years, being
unable to move things forward and if she wanted to move something forward, she called Councilmembers
to get votes. That is the process like it or not and those are the procedures on a national level. Maybe next
year, the Council will flip in other direction. She understood the frustration at not being able to get items
on the agenda but that did not mean the rules should be changed because a Councilmember could not get
something on the agenda. If an idea is pertinent, it can always be brought up to the body and the full body
can make decision via a majority vote to put something on the agenda. Unfortunately, there are a lot of
items on the extended agenda. She suggested sometimes it takes a while to get things on the agenda. For
example if there was an issue a Councilmember wanted on the agenda, the August 24' meeting is open.
She concluded she understood how Councilmember Olson felt because she had been in her shoes multiple
times but that is democracy at its finest
Councilmember Buckshnis said the previous speaker may have mixed up the voting record versus getting
things on the agenda. She has been on Council the same length of time and could hardly remember there
being disputes about putting something on the agenda except during the last two years. She recalled in 2019
then Councilmembers Mesaros and Dave Teitzel attempted to put the salary survey information on the
agenda but the Council President was not ready with the data. She did not care which side she was on when
an item came to a vote, but if she had issues she wanted on the agenda, the Council President did not have
the right to veto a committee's recommendation or decide not to put an important item on the agenda
because the Council President should represent the Council not the Administration or their own personal
agenda.
Council President Paine commented there are times when she has to make decisions regarding the agenda.
During the past year, there have been many opportunities to make motions to get things on the agenda at
the Council meeting. Tonight was a good example and there have been other good examples such as the
moratorium on building which was proposed at a Council meeting by a Councilmember. There are also
times when it is more appropriate to do scheduling as a Councilmember such as special meetings or settings.
Councilmembers are responsible for making those connections and getting things on the agenda by
contacting the Council President. She preferred to retain the requirement for a majority vote for the reasons
she stated; Councilmembers can get things on the agenda, but sometimes there is very limited room on
agendas.
Councilmember L. Johnson said in seriously considering this, she was looking for precedence.
Parliamentarians and those who use Robert's Rules of Order as a guide, the procedure for adoption and
adding to the agenda is a majority rule. There must be a reason it is set up that way, to have meetings run
smoothly, and avoiding clogging up meetings with back and forth that prevents meetings from moving
forward. She was unable to find precedence for adopting less than the majority for an agenda item.
Councilmember Olson said the best point made tonight was it was done this way at the state and federal
levels. She personally was not preparing for any of those roles; all she cared about was good outcomes from
the process in the Edmonds Council Chambers. She has seen this be a block to that and there have been
items that did not get put on the agenda for discussion. For that reason, this a very important change for
good outcomes in Edmonds. She reiterated this was not for her personally or forever and acknowledged she
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 8
got something added to the agenda tonight although it was at the end of the agenda and the Council might
not get to it. She was hopeful since it was added to the agenda it would show up on the next agenda which
did not happen the last time something was added during a Council meeting. She has and will accept
majority votes and has and will continue to call around to get four votes when she is trying to get something
on an agenda. She has not been successful in the past and has been blocked, to the detriment of the residents.
She respectfully requested the Council approve the proposed change.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed the Council wanted good outcomes for the people who live in
Edmonds, but she also understood procedures. Although Councilmembers have said it did not happen
before the last 1-2 years; it did and it happened to her many times. If the Council President doesn't make
these decisions, the Council could just have a sign up list for agendas. The Council has to trust whoever
they elect as Council President that they will do the best job they can and she believed Council President
Paine has tried her hardest to do a good job, it is a very difficult job. She did not understand the purpose of
changing this when the existing requirement is a majority vote.
Action on Amendment #1
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-4-1), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND
OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L.
JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Olson commented the amendment to 3.2.13 was not relevant if the amendment was not
made to Section 3.2.A.
Amendment #2
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO AMEND THE SECOND SENTENCE OF 3.2.11 TO READ, "THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILL
MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO PLACE A COUNCILMEMBER'S ITEM AN 'TEA! rnrrNGI
R0%1Ln BY CONSENSUS coo ,nrAJOPATA�- � ON AN AGENDA. IF TIME IS NOT
AVAILABLE FOR THE REQUESTED DATE, IT SHALL BE PLACED ON THE NEXT
AVAILABLE AGENDA.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she understood the purpose of 3.2.A which in her opinion was at a given
meeting. If a Councilmember is trying to get something on an agenda, she has seen Council Presidents put
something on an agenda without a pre -vote or majority of the Council. The Council President should serve
the Council and do their best to accommodate the wishes of the individual Councilmembers. As she stated
previously, the Council President should not substitute their own judgment, but should work with
Councilmembers to accommodate their individual needs and schedule.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the motion was not appropriate because it conflicts with 3.2.A.
Councilmember Distelhorst expressed his confusion with the amendment to a handwritten amendment
distributed by a Councilmember. He said 3.1 may speak to the Councilmember's motion when it is not
related to requesting agenda items be added at a meeting but the preparation of an agenda which is covered
under 3.1. He requested the motion be restated.
Councilmember Olson said she did not perceive 3.2 as only during a meeting. She asked if that was what
Councilmember Distelhorst meant, that 3.2 was only related to adding an agenda item at a meeting.
Councilmember Distelhorst said "majority vote or consensus of the Council," could be interpreted either
way but he was unclear whether the motion related to preparation of the agenda or during a Council meeting
where a majority vote would be taken.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 9
Councilmember Olson said in her experience 3.2.A and 3.2.13 were the ways a Councilmember could try to
get something on an agenda in advance of a meeting.
Councilmember K. Johnson read 3.2, "An item for a Council meeting may be placed on the agenda by one
of the following methods, A and B. Under B is a qualifying statement that the Council President will make
every effort to place an item on the agenda." Her motion was to delete "Council approved by consensus or
majority vote." It is the responsibility of the Council President to put items on the agenda and not take a
vote before deciding whether to add it to the agenda. The qualifying statement also says, "If time is not
available for the requested date, it shall be placed on the next available agenda." which Councilmember K.
Johnson said is where the process has broken down.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the Council approves the agenda at every meeting. She reiterated this
amendment conflicts which 3.2.A and allows items to be put on the agenda without authority whenever the
Council President is able to put it on. She encouraged the Council not to support the amendment.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for Councilmember Distelhorst's suggestion for
Councilmember K. Johnson's amendment to be added to 3.1 as she could see both points of view. The
language in 3.2.13, "the Council President will make every effort..." meant the Council President should
make every effort to support Councilmembers putting things on the agenda.
Action on Amendment #2
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment #3
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AMEND SECTION 5.15 ONLINE MEETINGS, TO READ, "WHEN ONLINE
MEETINGS OR ONLINE PARTICIPATION INA REGULAR MEETING ARE PERMITTED...".
Action on Amendment #3
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Olson proposed adding a new paragraph under Section 10 regarding when an ordinance is
proposed as an emergency ordinance, but does not meet the criterion for passage as an emergency
ordinance. The way that has been handled in the past is not good process.
Amendment #4
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADD A NEW PARAGRAPH UNDER SECTION 10 THAT READS AS FOLLOWS:
"WHEN AN ITEM IS BROUGHT FORWARD AS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AND FAILS
TO PASS BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE DISCUSSION HELD PRIOR TO THE VOTE WILL
CONSTITUTE ONE OF THE TOUCHES OF THE LEGISLATION. IT WILL COME BACK TO
THE AGENDA AT A FUTURE MEETING IF TO BE PURSUED AS A NON -EMERGENCY
ORDINANCE, AS OLD BUSINESS."
Councilmember Olson said when emergency ordinances have been passed, but not by a unanimous vote,
the technique was to delete the word "emergency" and it became a regular ordinance that took effect in the
usual number of days versus an emergency ordinance that takes effect immediately. However, the due
process that is normally given gets lost in that approach to the detriment of good outcomes. The whole
reason that something is typically introduced as New Business and then brought back as Old Business is to
give Councilmembers time to be thoughtful about it and for residents to contribute their thoughts on the
subject which is totally lost under the approach that has been utilized in the past. It would be in the Council's
best interest to change that approach and formalize it as the amendment states.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 10
Councilmember Distelhorst recalled when this was brought up previously, he vote in support of having a
section related to unanimous votes. He recall City Attorney Jeff Taraday said it was regulated by RCW and
relevant caselaw. He was supportive of having something in the rules about this, but wanted to ensure it
included necessary language and legal review to ensure it complied with the RCW and caselaw. He was
interested in having Mr. Brubaker or Mr. Taraday work on that language. Mr. Brubaker said this may be
the only place in the state statutes that apply to code cities where a unanimous vote is required. The issue
is if a unanimous vote fails, what procedure does the Council undertake to continue to address the matter
such as drop it entirely, move it to a subsequent agenda or adopt it that night as a non -emergency ordinance.
It is up to the Council to determine how best to handle that.
Council President Paine provided an example, an emergency ordinance is proposed and the Council has not
had a lot of time to review it. The ordinance passes with a majority vote but not a unanimous vote. She
asked if there was an opportunity for a 60 day review. Mr. Brubaker explained this is related to the powers
of initiative and referendum, whether an action by the City Council is subject to referendum back to the
voters. Most ordinance are subject to referendum, certain ordinances are not; one of those ordinances is an
emergency ordinance if passed by unanimous vote. An emergency ordinance does not necessarily require
a unanimous vote; but if there is not a unanimous vote, it may be subject to referendum. There are other
ordinance that are exempt from initiative and referendum and can take effect five days after publication in
the local paper. An emergency ordinance is generally effective immediately. Otherwise, ordinances passed
by the Council are subject to referendum and citizens have 30 days from the date of passage to put together
a referendum petition.
Mr. Brubaker clarified the question, if an ordinance does not pass as an emergency ordinance, what happens
to the ordinance — does it die, get amended and then potentially become subject to initiative and referendum
or does is it placed on a future agenda for further discussion? Council President Paine observed if an
emergency ordinance passes but not with a unanimous vote, it still passes but there is a delay in the effective
date. Mr. Brubaker agreed. Council President Paine said the amendment would provide additional time to
discuss it, but the Council can always bring ordinances back for discussion. Mr. Brubaker answered a
majority of the Council or the Council President could bring the ordinance back based on these proposed
rules. If an emergency ordinance fails to get a unanimous, it could still be a valid, but may be subject to
initiative and referendum so the effective date is later.
Councilmember Olson offered to withdraw the motion and revisit it next week after there has been further
investigation.
Action on Amendment #4
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH AGREEMENT OF THE
SECOND.
Amendment #5
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON,
TO REMOVE THE ENTIRE SECTION 13, REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES.
Councilmember Buckshnis said in reading this section, it can be extremely subjective. There is a City
expense policy that covers the City Council and that policy has been used for 20 years. She referred to the
recent example, reimbursement of Councilmember Olson for the Pruitt investigation, that was disallowed
because she did not get the data before the confirmation. She felt this section was added to the rules as
either retribution or punitive and did not believe the Council needed rules that included language like
"disallowed," "failure" or "neglect of the Councilmember." Councilmembers should understand their roles
and responsibilities; most have had professional lives and should know what they are doing and what their
oversight rules are. She did not believe Section 13 was needed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 11
Council President Paine said this language as needed and did stem from the incident with Councilmember
Olson. This section allows Councilmembers to be reimbursed if additional research is necessary. The
current policy that Councilmember Buckshnis referenced is a good policy but it was intended to address
the purchase of food, drink and other items for volunteer celebrations and did not address the specific needs
of Council oversight work if fees are involved. She would object to using the existing policy due to the
separation of powers; the Council is doing legislative work, this section is intended to support legislative
work. The section includes a dollar amounts and includes a check and balance. She spoke extensively with
Mr. Mr. Taraday about this section; it allows for equity across all the Council's oversight responsibilities
and if a request exceeds the dollar amount, then it comes to the entire Council. The existing policy requires
approval/disapproval by the Council President. She requested Council support for retaining this section.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with Council President Paine, commenting she has seen many
cities get into serious trouble for spending money on inappropriate things or going over budget. While she
was Council President, some of the things she signed were a surprising use of City funds such as requesting
reimbursement for the use of an HOV lane and she did not think Councilmembers should have that level of
discretion. The City funds are not the Council's personal checkbook but taxpayer dollars and it is important
to limit spending. This is a check and balance for the citizens and taxpayers, therefore, she would not
support the amendment.
Councilmember L. Johnson appreciated the language in Section 13 which states for the first $250 of
expenditures, the onus for appropriateness rests on the individual Councilmember making the expenditure
and removes the Council President and Council from that which she felt was a great addition to the rules
and would remove the Council President from reviewing small, minutiae items. After the first $250, the
previous procedure would apply.
Councilmember Olson said the City policy is clear that it must be an authorized expense and directly
incurred in the role of Councilmember or employee. Councilmembers are considered City employee as is
clear from the benefit package. The language regarding justifiable expense is in the City policy but the
amount is not. She did not think Councilmembers should be encouraged to incur expenses. For example,
she had been on Council over a year before she requested reimbursement and she has not requested any
reimbursements since. She felt Section 13 was superfluous and not something that would arise often. The
materials she distributed included an alternative amendment to Section 13, but she would support
Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment to remove it entirely and possibly substitute reference to the City
policy for employee reimbursement.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not like Section 13.3 Reimbursement Process, because she believed
the Council President should be informed of what Councilmembers are doing even though the Council
President does not manage them. She could not think of anything Councilmembers needed to spend $250
on. The City policy is clear that City employees must provide receipts and information and must provide
that information to their superior. This section appears to say the Council did not have to abide by that. As
professionals, Councilmembers should understand their oversight roles and referenced the Council
President's denial of a $367 reimbursement request for a report that some Councilmembers needed to vote
appropriately since the agenda item was moved forward a week.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order regarding Councilmember Buckshnis' comments.
Councilmember Buckshnis responded she was providing examples. Mayor Nelson suggested the examples
not include such specificity regarding issues upon which there was disagreement.
Councilmember Buckshnis continued, Section 13 was too subjective and there are sufficient City policies
that Councilmember have complied with for many years. The City expense policy was reviewed in detail
in 2014 and was similar to many other cities' expense policy. The City Council should not be elite and have
different specifications for their expenses.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 12
Councilmember L. Johnson asked the City Attorney if Councilmember were City employees. Mr. Brubaker
answered Councilmembers are elected officials and can be disciplined; the only way to be removed from
office is to be recalled or unelected. Generally the policy is Councilmembers receive a monthly salary,
reimbursement, and the benefit of the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and health insurance.
Whether Councilmembers are actual employees is a more complicated question.
Councilmember Distelhorst recalled when the Council discussed this previously, a lot of Councilmembers
voiced appreciation for clarity and that documentation of policies and procedures would have been very
beneficial when taking office. This section adds clarity to this document, especially around expenses that
are not the day-to-day items related to the role of a Councilmember, but more discretionary spending that
one Councilmember may see as relevant and another may not. This provides that guidance and takes away
subjectiveness. He preferred to retain Section 13 as it would benefit current and future Councilmembers.
With regard to whether Councilmembers are employees, Councilmember Olson, said Councilmembers
were named as a category in that policy.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said based on experience, she has seen all sorts of reimbursement requests
from Councilmembers such as classes and training which would likely be under $250. Although she has
not, some Councilmember submit reimbursement requests for mileage. The $250 is not tons of money and
the intent is accountability to the public, otherwise there are no guidelines. This section is a good idea to
ensure everyone is on the up and up, especially with what has happened in other cities around Edmonds.
Action on Amendment #5
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment #6
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
AMEND SECTION 13.3 AS FOLLOWS: EACH COUNCILMEMBER SHALL BE CNTUI RQ 4:0
ASD19SCRIBEDIN13.I AB(M">;.TOSEEK REIMBURSEMENT FOR ALLOWED EXPENSES PER
13.1 ABOVE, THE COUNCILMEMBER SHALL SUBMIT A DESCRIPTION OF THE
EXPENDITURE, AN EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THE EXPENDITURE SATISFIES THE
CRITERIA FOR AN ALLOWED EXPENSE, AND SUFFICIENT RECEIPTS, STATEMENTS, OR
OTHER DOCUMENTATION TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE EXPENSE WAS ACTUALLY
INCURRED. '
ANNUALTHRESHOLD, NO PREA PPROV A 1 OF THE EXPENDITURE 1S REQUIR1: -L'L
PREAPPROVAL FROM GITV GOU NCI L WOULD B E REQU !RED ONGE THE $250 ANN"; A
THRESHOLD S EXGCCTEiI TYiE DESCRIPTION, EXPLANATION, AND OTLi�tb
1T- 814ALL BE DEEMED APPROVED AND T14E EXPENSE
REQUIEST,
SHALL BE PAID UNLESS THE REQUEST 1S DISA-P-PROVED BY .'%- M-A-10-RI-TY PLUS ONE Or,
COUNCILMEMBERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT SUCH EXPENSES
INCURRED WITHOUT PREAPPROVAL AND EXCEEDING S250/ANNUALLY MAY NOT BE
REIMBURSABLE DUE TO BUDGET CONSTRAINTS AND/OR THE JUDGMENT OF A MAJORITY
PLUS ONE OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL TO DISAPPROVE THE REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST
EXCEEDING S250/ANNUALLY ONCE IT IS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Councilmember Olson commented perhaps this was too wordy and she suggested it be amended. She asked
if it still made sense without the second $250/annually.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 13
Council President Paine commented the $250 did not include travel or normal expenses. She anticipated an
expense not being reimbursable due to budget constraints would come up during Council discussion.
Councilmember Olson answered that was her intent, that an expense was not automatically disallowed if it
was over $250 but that it would subject to budget constraints as well as to a vote of the Council and a
majority plus one would be required to disapprove.
Council President Paine said Section 13.3 says that by requiring preapproval, the fourth and fifth sentences
states, "Preapproval from City Council would be required once the $250 annual threshold is exceeded. The
description, explanation, and other documentation described above shall be placed on the consent agenda
for approval, PROVIDED THAT when the council acts on the reimbursement request, it shall be deemed
approved and the expense shall be paid unless the request is disapproved by a majority plus one of the full
city council." She explained an expense would need to be pulled off the consent agenda for discussion by
the full Council and a majority plus one would be required to deny the request.
Councilmember Olson explained she was offering the amendment as a possible improvement.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the amended language is already in this section. She referred to the
majority plus one to deny a reimbursement request and Councilmember Olson's earlier request that less
than a majority be required to put an item on the agenda which she felt didn't make sense and was
conflicting. She did not see the amendment as an improvement and would not support it.
Amendment #6A
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD TO $400 FROM $250.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented $400 would cover most situations but $250 may require a Council
vote. If the Council adopts a policy like this, it should be as streamlined as possible.
Council President Paine said she was uncomfortable with $400 because it is higher than what she anticipated
would be tolerable. The proposed rule states anything above $250 automatically goes to consent and it
requires a majority plus one to deny the reimbursement amount over $250. If the threshold was increased,
the same process would apply. She anticipated $400 could create a budget issue.
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, asking the amount Councilmember Olson
requested for reimbursement that resulted in the creation of this policy. Councilmember Olson answered it
was $337.90. She reiterated she had not requested a reimbursement before or since.
Action on Amendment #6A
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Councilmember Olson restated the amendment:
AMEND SECTION 13.3 TO READ, "TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT FOR ALLOWED EXPENSES
PER 13.1 ABOVE, THE COUNCILMEMBER SHALL SUBMIT A DESCRIPTION OF THE
EXPENDITURE, AN EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THE EXPENDITURE SATISFIES THE
CRITERIA FOR AN ALLOWED EXPENSE, AND SUFFICIENT RECEIPTS, STATEMENTS, OR
OTHER DOCUMENTATION TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE EXPENSE WAS ACTUALLY
INCURRED. COUNCILMEMBERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT SUCH EXPENSES INCURRED
WITHOUT PREAPPROVAL AND EXCEEDING $250/ANNUALLY MAY NOT BE
REIMBURSABLE DUE TO BUDGET CONSTRAINTS AND/OR THE JUDGMENT OF A
MAJORITY PLUS ONE OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL ONCE IT IS PULLED FROM THE
CONSENT AGENDA.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 14
Councilmember Distelhorst commented staff will be working on the section regarding emergency
ordinances and unanimous votes and suggested this amendment would benefit from typing it up and
clarifying it.
Action on Amendment #6
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE
SECOND.
Council President Paine suggested the language in Section 10 be clarified and not require a law degree to
figure out so Councilmembers and laypeople can follow the distinction between referendum, how
emergency ordinances are adopted, and steps for reviewing an emergency ordinance a second time.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to Section 7 Public Testimony, pointing out 7.1.13 was not the
Council's usual way of doing things, "If during a Regular Meeting an agenda item is before the Council for
the first time and is not part of the consent agenda, public comment for that item will follow the staff
presentation but precede Council review. Individuals may speak for three minutes or less." She asked City
Clerk Scott Passey to explain the intent of this section. Mr. Passey explained this rule contemplated
something was on the agenda for the first time and would give the public an opportunity to comment on
something they have not seen before. He could not think of a situation where that would happen because of
the way agendas are done and public comment occurs at the beginning. This rule may not be necessary at
this point, but was included for Council consideration.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked who would be responsible for making the changes to the Rules of
Procedure. Mr. Brubaker said Mr. Taraday will return to the office on Monday. He will do some preliminary
work and send it to Mr. Taraday and Mr. Passey and hopefully have the revised rules on the agenda in the
next 1-2 weeks.
Amendment #7
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO RECOMMENDED STAFF TAKE A SECOND HARD LOOK AT SECTION 3.5, RELATED TO
HOW ORDINANCES ARE SCHEDULED.
Councilmember K. Johnson pointed out there is a three step process outlined in 3.5, but she did not think it
served the purpose if the first step was scheduling the item on the Extended Agenda. She pointed out an
ordinance did not have a reading on the extended agenda, it was only the title. She preferred the first reading
be at Council committee, the second at Council discussion and the third Council decision. The Council has
used a three touch rule, using the committee system and discussion at one meeting followed by action at a
subsequent meeting. Just putting an ordinance on the extended agenda does not satisfy the first touch
because it is just the title with no content. Rather than wordsmith that section tonight, she preferred to have
the City Attorney and City Clerk work on the wording.
Councilmember L. Johnson commented the proposed amendment stated the three touches start in Council
committee. That often works but not always and she found that very limiting because committees only meet
once a month. She did not support the amendment.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas cited the importance of transparency and citizens input, relaying her
preference that ordinances come to a full Council meeting where there is public comment versus a
committee meeting where there is no engagement with the public. She did not support the amendment.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the committee structure has been marginalized and committee
members voices are not heard. She recall ordinances being listed by the plat number instead of the real issue
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 15
and said ordinances need to be more clearly defined versus just a file or plan number. She did not recall
many ordinances that have had three touch/reading rule. She agreed this section needed to be clarified.
Councilmember Olson said she had been looking for a place in the rules to put the three touch rule. That is
the right way to do business when something is not time critical and the committee should count as one of
the touches but if it does not originate in committee, the extended agenda may be sufficient. She asked if
the motion was to work on this section. Councilmember K. Johnson said yes. Councilmember Olson relayed
her support for the amendment.
Action on Amendment #7
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment #8
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
REMOVE SECTION 11. 3, "AS A MATTER OF COURTESY, LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, OR
OTHER COMMUNICATION OF A CONTROVERSIAL NATURE, WHICH DO NOT EXPRESS
THE MAJORITY OPINION OF THE COUNCIL, SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE FULL
COUNCIL AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TO PUBLICATION."
Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is very subjective and she has seen Council Presidents write
opinion letters. Councilmembers should know the breadth and liability the City may face if they write
something incorrect. She recalled an instance a few years ago where the minority Councilmembers wrote
to the DWFW which the Council should have sanctioned them for. She did not feel the specificity in this
section was appropriate such as the 24 hour notice. Councilmembers are professionals and should
understand their role. She has written opinion letters about the CIP/CFP; it was a minority opinion but she
wrote about it to provide clarity. She concluded this section was unnecessary.
Council President Paine supported retaining this section, noting when Council votes, it is their duty to
support the voice of the full Council. Providing 24 hour notice to Council is a courtesy and is not a denial.
If this section is removed, Councilmembers cannot write letters that are contrary to the majority opinion
and after the Council votes, Councilmembers need to speak as one Council. She supposed this section could
be read either way but this would allow some level of communication of an opposing position.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out this section did not say Councilmembers could not write a
letter to the editor, just that it needed to be presented to the full Council first. The intent was not to keep
Councilmembers from having their own opinions but to request a warning. She was okay with retaining
this section.
Councilmember Olson asked if this applied only to a minority opinion and not all letters to the editor. She
felt 24 hours was unreasonable if it was for anything a Councilmember writes. Mr. Passey said this rule is
rooted in the principal that the decision making authority lies within the Council itself and not individual
members. Once a decision is made by the Council and a vote is taken, the issue should not be revisited.
However, if a Councilmember in the minority and wants to revisit it, this section requires Councilmembers
be given 24 hours' notice as a courtesy. Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding of Mr. Passey's
explanation that it was not for all letters to the editor or all communications by Councilmembers, but
regarding a Council decision. Mr. Passey answered yes, this implies a Council decision that may have been
controversial in nature. Councilmember Olson suggested that be fully communicated when the rules come
back to Council.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if something could be presented to full Council by email or does full
Council entail a Council meeting. Mr. Passey answered it could be presented via email. He envisioned if a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 16
Councilmember planned to submit an editorial to the local paper, a copy or the substance of the letter would
be provided to other Councilmembers.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to "other communication of a controversial nature," remarking she
sometimes has to explain to people why she voted in the minority. She suggested the section state, "letters
to the editor or editorials" and not include "other communication." She is often contacted by media who
has a 10 a.m. deadline and provides a statement from the minority position. She felt this was getting too
complicated on the fact that some Councilmembers have a minority position and she did not support
notifying the Council 24 hours in advance. Mr. Passey suggested striking "or other communication."
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested it made more sense when reading all three sections together:
11.1 Once the City Council has taken a position on an issue, all official City correspondence regarding
the issue will reflect the Council's adopted position.
11.2 Email, City letterhead, and related materials shall not be used for correspondence of
Councilmembers representing a dissenting point of view from an official Council position.
11.3 As a matter of courtesy, letters to the editor, or other communication of a controversial nature,
which do not express the majority opinion of the Council, shall be presented to the full Council at
least 24 hours prior to publication.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with removing "or other communication." She said
Councilmembers should be able to tell people why they voted a certain way when they are contacted.
Action on Amendment #8
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF
THE SECONDER AS IT WILL BE HANDLED BY MR. PASSEY.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. Following the recess, Mayor Nelson relayed due to the late hour and
in consultation with Council President Paine, the Landmark Tree Ordinance will be rescheduled for another
evening and Temporary Policy Extending Emergency Sick Leave be moved before the 2021 Taste Edmonds
Event Contract.
2. LANDMARK TREE ORDINANCE EXTENSION
Due to the late hour, this item will be rescheduled.
8. NEW BUSINESS
1. COUNCIL ACTION REGARDING INITIAL VACATION ACCRUAL RATE FOR A
WWTP PLANT SUPERVISOR CANDIDATE
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained there is a terrific candidate for the WWTP Superintendent.
In discussing an employment offer, the candidate has requested and staff is hoping to offer vacation accrual
commensurate with his 24 years of experience in the wastewater industry. He requested the offer letter to
the candidate allow him to enter the City's vacation accrual system at that level.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO OFFER THE SELECTED APPLICANT THE
OPPORTUNITY TO EARN 25 DAYS OF ANNUAL VACATION BASED ON THE EDMONDS
CITY CODE CHAPTER 2.35.030.
Councilmember Buckshnis assured the public that this was not creating a precedent, it was not a unique
situation and has been done in the past. Mr. Williams agreed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 17
Council President Paine pointed out the City has been searching for this candidate a long time. Mr. Williams
said the search has lasted three years.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. TEMPORARY POLICY EXTENDING EMERGENCY SICK LEAVE
HR Director Neill Hoyson commented this is an extension of the emergency sick leave first provided under
the FFCRA required by the federal government that expired December 31, 2020. At staff s request, Council
previously agreed to extend the emergency sick leave provision of the FFCRA, the 80 hours of emergency
sick leave, through June 30'. Due to the Delta variant and a significant uptick in employees who have
contracted COVID or have had to quarantine due to exposure, she requested the emergency sick leave be
extended through December 315t. It does not provide an additional 80 hours; it is the same 80 hours that all
employees had access to from April 2, 2020 through December 31, 2021. If an employee has already used
the 80 hours, they do not have access to it again.
Councilmember L. Johnson said a six month extension from today's date would extend it through January.
She expressed interest in setting a date that would get through February and the cold and flu season. Ms.
Neill Hoyson advised it would be retroactive to the date of the expiration of the previous extension, June
30th, so a 6-month extension would be until December 315t. The Council could chose to propose a further
extension.
Council President Paine proposed a nine month extension that was retroactive to the expiration of the
previous extension to get through the flu season and COVID variants.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
ADD A WHEREAS CLAUSE REGARDING THE RETROACTIVE NATURE.
Councilmember Olson suggested the whereas clause read, "The proposal is retroactive to the expiration of
the June 30, 2021 extension in Resolution 1466. She pointed out the narrative did not state that this was
retroactive and requested that information be included in the packet in the future.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO EXTEND THE RESOLUTION, INSTEAD OF 6 MONTHS, FOR 9 MONTHS
THROUGH MARCH 31, 2022.
Councilmember Olson said she understood the thought process and the challenge to find room on the agenda
for items, but if there was a change in COVID, there may be things from the State and it would be the
Council's prerogative to revisit this and approve another extension at that point. She preferred to be
conservative and retain the six months extension proposed through December 315t and have HR come back
if a further extension was necessary.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if this was only for COVID. Ms. Neill Hoyson answered yes.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas offered her support for a nine month extension, acknowledging it could
be canceled sooner if it looked like COVID had run its course.
Council President Paine point out if this expired December 31, 2021, the Council did not meet in the latter
part of December.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 18
Councilmember Distelhorst pointed out there is information in the resolution related to any new federal
legislation. Ms. Neill Hoyson agreed, commenting there is currently no federal legislation reinstating the
FFCRA that would apply to Edmonds, but if there was, the City would shift and be compliant with it.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO PASS A THE TEMPORARY POLICY EXTENDING THE EMERGENCY SICK
LEAVE AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. 2021 TASTE EDMONDS EVENT CONTRACT
Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Angie Feser explained she was presenting the
2021 Taste Edmonds event contract for Council consideration to authorize for the Mayor's signature. This
item was presented to the Parks & Public Works Committee on July 13' and recommended for consent, but
there were some concerns by City Administration about the event due to the new location and programming
changes requiring more detailed information/clarification, which has since been added to the attached
contract. Tonight's presentation is intended to highlight those changes.
Ms. Feser displayed a site plan for the Taste of Edmonds, renamed as Taste 21 this year. This is a three-day
music festival with a 2-acre beer garden, and food trucks which is a primary fundraiser for the Edmonds
Chamber of Commerce to provide free annual community events such as 4' of July Parade & Fireworks
Show, Edmonds Classic Car Show, Halloween Trick -or -Treat Night and the Tree Lighting Ceremony. It
also provides for thousands of dollars of donations for local non -profits & service clubs. She reviewed:
• Changes from last event 2019
1. Event location
o From Civic Park to Frances Anderson Center Field (20%) due to construction of Civic
2. Event Programming
o From a Family event to a 21+ only event
o Increased size of beer/wine garden
o Size: From 65,000 square feet to 95,000 square feet
o Capacity: From 4,000 to 5,000 people
3. New policy legislation
o Roles of Edmonds Police/Event Security different
■ The new expectations of policing legislation focuses on a reduction of police
interactions that might result in potential uses of force by law enforcement. This can
significantly change the roles of both police and security personnel for the event.
• Event contract items
1. Increase insurance coverage — new for all city -sponsored events with alcohol
2. Amplified sound as per ECC 5.30
3. Event safety plan — Edmonds Police Department review
4. Other requirements
o State of Washington Liquor & Cannabis Board license
o South County Fire Food Vendor & Festival requirements
o Snohomish County health Department — food rucks
o Federal state and local COVID guidelines
Next steps
o Forward to August 17 regular meeting consent agenda or approve tonight
Councilmember Olson thanked Ms. Feser for working with the Chamber to make this happen. Everyone
has seen this year what a huge community partner the Chamber is and how many Edmonds events are
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 19
actually conducted by the Chamber. She appreciated everything the Chamber brings to the community. She
thanked the neighbors who have historically been around the Taste for their patience and tolerance to help
make money to support all their good deeds. She also thanked the neighbors around the Frances Anderson
Center in advance for their tolerance and patience. The Chamber brings so much to the community and she
appreciated the neighbors' sacrifice.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ACCEPT THE EVENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS
AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR TASTE EDMONDS AND TO APPROVE IT
TONIGHT.
Councilmember Buckshnis questioned why a presentation had been necessary and hoped it was a great
event for the Chamber.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked about the current COVID guidelines for an events like this. When it came
to committee, there was the impression at that time if everyone was vaccinated, that would be protection
enough and since then there have been other findings. In the interest of avoiding a super spreader event,
she asked about the State's guidelines and/or additional measures to reduce partying, drinking and
spreading. Ms. Feser advised the federal CDC, state and Snohomish Health District guidelines have been
changing in the last few weeks, but primarily related to indoor activities and behaviors. There are currently
not a lot of guidelines for outdoor events such as enforcing mask wearing or vaccinations. The way the
contract is written, if anything changes, they must adhere to all the guidelines as of the date of the event.
She assured staff would be watching those closely for the safety of the community.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PAUSE THE BIASMATE PORTAL
Councilmember Olson expressed her appreciation to Mayor Nelson for being a person and leader who cares
about hate and bias in the community. However, she believed the portal implementation had real issues
related to privacy for people who have had reports filed on them or for them or naming them because
everything on the portal, unlike things reported to the police, are subject to public information requests.
There is no due process for having been named in a report and by virtue of having your name in this without
any truth or veracity, it might end up being a reputational problem for someone and impact things like
employment or applications to school. One of the concerns that has been voiced, almost exclusive by people
who have lived in countries with government overreach, is the use of lists generated in similar ways against
their citizens and having their neighbors be the eyes and ears of the government to report on them. She
found the portal problematic for those reasons.
In response to a Councilmember's earlier question about how much vetting had been done, as a member of
the public listening in to Diversity Commission meeting, Councilmember Olson said knew it had been
considered by a subcommittee, but it had not gotten out of the committee at the time it was implemented.
If it had gotten out of committee, it would have come to the full Diversity Commission and been voted on
as an official recommendation. Had it become an official recommendation, by code it would have been
brought to the Mayor and the Council, another opportunity for vetting because everything that comes to
Council is a public process that allows public input. Some of that weighing in happened during public
comment and should be factors to consider whether this should go forward. At a minimum she
recommended immediately pausing the portal. A future presentation could include legal analysis of whether
there were due process and privacy issues and to hear from citizens before the Council considered it further.
At this time, the City is setting itself up for possible liability and unintended consequences that have not
been fully thought through.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 20
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
PAUSE THE BIAS AND HATE REPORTING PORTAL UNTIL FULL VETTING AND LEGAL
ANALYSIS IS CONDUCTED.
Council President Paine said while she appreciated the motion, she asked that the pause be delayed to hear
the Diversity Commission's comments about the portal at their meeting tomorrow, to allow them to
complete their process and to hear what the Diversity Commission wants done with the portal. She agreed
a presentation needed to be provided at some point but it was premature until more was heard from the
Diversity Commission.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she totally disagreed with Council President Paine. She believed the portal
should be paused until the Diversity Commission comes forward. She spoke with a number of members
who expressed concern with how it suddenly materialized on the City's website. She agreed the Mayor had
the right to this administrative duty, but the City could be liable. She worked in Lithuania and Kazakhstan,
both post -communistic countries, and knew what it was like to be a snitch or spy on your neighbor. There
are too many ramifications from improper use and a number of examples have been provided. She supported
the pause occurring tonight and remaining in effect until the Diversity Commission makes a
recommendation, noting the Diversity Commission has not yet completed their vetting process. Once that
vetting occurs, it can be presented to Council and Council can decide whether to reinstate the portal. She
concluded at this juncture she believed it was dangerous for the City. Mayor said Council will refrain from
language "dangerous for the City."
Councilmember K. Johnson expressed her 100% support for a pause. She did not want to wait for the
Diversity Commission and wanted to pause it now and to have a legal analysis done as soon as possible.
She believed this was the wrong direction and knew this was not a recommendation of the Diversity
Commission. It appeared for the first time in their annual report as something they were thinking about and
the next thing we know, it was activated. She reiterated her support for pausing it tonight.
Councilmember L. Johnson said in doing her own research to understand how such a portal could be used
and who might recommend it, she came across CAPAA, Washington State Commission on Asian Pacific
American Affairs. One of the things they specifically state in addition to writing down all the details of an
incident and contacting the police if it is criminal, is that state, county and city governments and other
organizations often have a place to report. On their site, they include some of these locations such as Seattle
and King County. Further research found that Philadelphia, Eugene, Portland, New York City, Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, Spokane, University of Washington and almost every other university have this. It is something
that is recommended by groups that work to combat hate and come up with ways to document so we know
where to put resources toward combating this.
With regard to the legal question, Councilmember L. Johnson said all these cities wouldn't have it if there
were the legal concerns that were voiced at the previous Council meeting. She asked the City Attorney if
there was something that justified shutting it down tonight due to questions of legal jeopardy or was this a
matter of educating the public and possibly finetuning this resource. City Attorney Tom Brubaker said he
was not sure if there was or was not legal jeopardy; he could not guarantee a lawsuit wouldn't be filed. It
was his understanding that a person goes to the portal, files a complaint, and it just stays there and is not
published in a way that is broadly open to the public simply by filing a complaint. It is possible a person
could make a public records request and find out who has been complained about. His opinion was it was
not likely the City would incur liability but more research needs to be done to be certain of that.
Mr. Brubaker explained the Mayor is the chief administrative officer of the City and as such, he established
this portal. In his opinion any vote the Council took would be advisory to the Mayor because he has chosen
this, the same as someone could report a pothole complaint. There may be other avenues open to the Council
in terms of setting ordinances and policies, but he did not think the Council could simply order the duly
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 21
elected chief administrator of the City to stop performing an administrative task. He had not had an
opportunity to talk about it in detail with Mr. Taraday and was uncertain he would agree but thought that
he would. He was relatively comfortable stating this opinion having been the City Attorney in Kent for 27
years and having taught municipal law at Seattle University School of Law.
Councilmember Olson said she definitely wanted to hear from the Diversity Commission as well as learn
the parameters other cities with portals have in place and who evaluate reports that are made. She was also
interested and curious to explore further what Mr. Brubaker said about this being strictly an administrative
role and something the Council cannot adopt policy on and demand a pause. In the past, it seems like the
Council has been given guidance that Council majority can affect policy and if the Council wants a policy
that the City does not have a reporting portal until it has been fully vetted, it seems they should be able to
do that. In her opinion this was time critical, and until it was fleshed out and carefully implemented, it
should be stopped. It is a week later than she wished the stop had happened. The public records request
mentioned earlier is the private issue she referred to; anyone that submits a public record request search by
name will receive information about every time someone filed a report about them which is a huge problem.
There is a lot to be done to make this something that is safe and that works for the community who are
coming out in large numbers very upset by this. She reiterated the people most upset are those who have
lived in places where systems like this have been used and abused, not just communist, but also totalitarian,
fascist, and right wing. She assured she was not making a political comment, but highlighting how this
could be a problem. This issue is critically important and time critical.
Mayor Nelson reminded the Council that we are not communist, fascist, but a democratic elected institution.
Mr. Brubaker said he was not commenting on the content or the substance of the motion, he was trying to
address the separation of powers issue.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she understood the Diversity Commission having been the liaison for
five years. She agreed if the Council was not comfortable that enough research had been done, they should
request more be done. She was very disappointed that the portal had been used as a joke and said that was
not what the portal was for. People may not understand that you can call the police and file a report on
someone they feel did something discriminatory toward them and that stays on the permanent record even
the person is found not guilty. She recalled people speaking to the Council about documents that still exist
even though charges have been dropped. If people think the portal is problematic, it can be done in different
ways. The portal is nothing more than could have been two weeks ago by contacting the police. Whether
the police investigates or not, it stays on file and if someone did a public records request by name, the
information would be there.
Councilmember Distelhorst said as the liaison to the Diversity Commission he is not involved in the
development of anything, and was not involved in the creation, development or recommendation of the
portal. He has listened to some of the discussion on the commission and heard about instances in the
community where people are called racial slurs and racial epithets and it is not a crime because there is no
threat of violence. This is a problem in the community, it is a problem with his coworkers in his day job
who are called racial slurs and are discouraged from reporting it because it's not a hate crime according to
the RCW. Edmonds College has a bias incident hate crime reporting; if you see something say something.
After last week's Council meeting, he started researching this and began receiving ads on Facebook for the
Department of Homeland Security, see something say something, report incidents.
Councilmember Distelhorst said these issues cannot be addressed if we don't know they're happening. This
is not a snitch list, not McCarthyism, not a communist, totalitarian, fascist, Nazi country like some people
said last week; this is a country where people should be able to live free from being called racial slurs and
being discriminated against. If we don't know about it, we're covering it up and can't address it. He recalled
seeing at an Edmonds School District school a statement on equity, anti -hate, anti -bias and anti-
discrimination on their window and when that happens in an Edmonds School District school, they stop the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 22
lesson to address it. Elected City leaders should be no different; when they see bias or discrimination in the
community, they should stop it. Anyone can say anything they want in an email to Council or during public
comment and it is a matter of public record; it doesn't have to come through a portal, it can be an email or
written letter or someone making a statement at the podium as people did last week. That does not change
the nature of public records.
Councilmember Distelhorst emphasized issues in the community, schools, businesses, nonprofits,
government or in policies cannot be addressed if we don't know about it. We have to know what's
happening to make it better. There is a Find It Fix It app in Seattle for potholes; someone can take a picture
of a pothole and ask the city to fix it. Sometimes he needs to take a picture of racism and say please come
fix it. He looked forward to the discussion at the Diversity Commission tomorrow night because this
happened in between their meetings and the Anti -Hate Town Hall. He was interested in learning from the
Administration whether things could be tweaked or improved, but this knee jerk reaction to dismiss the
lived experiences of people in the community who are hurting and being discriminated against is sad and
disappointing especially for a City Council that recently passed a Safe City Resolution about promoting
equity and inclusiveness and making sure that people can live here free of discrimination, free of racism
and free of bias. This is an opportunity to stand up for that.
Councilmember L. Johnson said Councilmember Distelhorst said it better than she could have and she
concurred 100%with his statements.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE AND SECONDED TO EXTEND TO
10:20 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
(Councilmember K. Johnson left the dais at 9:59 p.m.)
To Councilmember Distelhorst, Councilmember Buckshnis said no one disagrees with him, the issue that
many people have is that it had not been properly vetted. The portal was put up and she believed that it was
a policy issue and that there could potentially be a liability and therefore should be reviewed in more detail.
Even though other cities have anti -hate portals, there is no information that compares those cities to
Edmonds. She was provided four examples of how the portal had been used improperly and she preferred
to be safe rather than sorry. As a legislator, she was aware of the separation of power, but said there was
also a policy issue and a potential liability issue. With potential liability in the past, the City goes err on the
side of caution. She was moving to the side of caution and preferred to pause the portal until it was
completely vetted. She has seen the portal used as a joke and has seen terrible things said about a City
employee; the portal is just not working the way it was intended and should be stopped.
Councilmember Olson said she was not dismissing hearing from the people on this subject. There are better
approaches, possibly starting with a quarterly town hall meeting, or a segment in the Diversity Commission
meeting where things are discussed. She agreed with the need to know and that the City probably hasn't
known about issues in the past due to a lack of effort. She thanked Mayor Nelson for bring this to the
forefront, having this conversation on a regular basis and hearing from people and maybe identifying
different ways that are beneficial but do not have a downside. With regard to public records, there is a
different system for the police. Until there is a court case, those documents are not available via a public
records request so making a report to the police is different. She felt very strongly about this and recognized
it may come back to this exact same approach, but the City was not ready for it now and she prefer to err
on the side of caution.
Council President Paine completely agreed with Councilmember Distelhorst as well as the need for
additional discussion about policy background and what the program will look like because that is essential
for broader community and Council understanding. She wanted to honor the Diversity Commission and
allow them to discuss this tomorrow night.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 23
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE CALLED THE QUESTION. UPON ROLL CALL, CALL THE
QUESTION CARRIED (6-0-1); COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST,
BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES;
AND COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, commented it was very disruptive to have a
Councilmember leave in the middle of the meeting, sit in the hallway and bounce in and out to vote. She
felt that was inappropriate and that the Councilmember's vote should not be counted. Mayor Nelson asked
Mr. Brubaker to comment. Mr. Brubaker said Councilmembers leave the dais to address any number of
issues. Councilmember K. Johnson did not state that she was leaving the meeting or terminating her
participation for the evening. He recommended she return to the dais if she wanted to vote.
(Councilmember K. Johnson returned to the dais at 10:06 p.m.)
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3-1); COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, AND L.
JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO; AND COUNCILMEMBER
FRALEY-MONILLAS ABSTAINING.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
(Councilmember K. Johnson left the dais at 10:07 p.m.)
Councilmember Buckshnis announced there would be another work party for the marsh restoration/clean
up on SR-104 from 10-12 p.m.. She suggested volunteers bring boots or waders. Volunteers are making
great progress at two work parties. She will bring WSDOT forms to fill out and volunteers can contact Joe
Scordino.
Councilmember Olson advised the marsh work party Councilmember Buckshnis mentioned is on Thursday
from 10-12 p.m.. She relayed it was a huge honor for Edmonds to be chosen by the Blue Heron Canoe
Family for their canoe welcoming and launch last Sunday and Monday. It was a very special thing to be
part of and she asked everyone in Edmonds to keep them in their hearts and minds during their upcoming
two week journey on the water.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented two people called in tonight to take what she believed were
political shots at her in particular because it is an election year. A radio talk show encouraged people to
come and face her down. She found it really inappropriate and offensive during an election period. She
asked Mayor Nelson to find out where they live and if they start talking about the election, that he call them
out of order.
Council President Paine recalled last week the community provided two hours of comments and a sense of
where they were at. Some of the comments were pointed, derogatory and used some very strong extreme
language. She reminded the public that this has been a very long pandemic and if 1918 is any example, we
may only be half way through this. The pandemic has taken a big toll on everyone and many people
including businesses and Councilmembers feel overwhelmed. Councilmembers care deeply about
community which is the reason they ran for office and why the community supported them. She encouraged
the public to recognize that everyone in the community cares, the City has a terrific volunteer core that
cares deeply about the community and are all looking to do good for the community.
Council President Paine referred to a breach of decorum last week by a Councilmember's comment about
the ARP funding. The Council already voted on that issue and Councilmembers should speak with one
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 24
voice. Talking about transferring funds from one place to another is not appropriate and she would
appreciate it if that Councilmember followed the appropriate guidelines and spoke with one voice.
Councilmember L. Johnson recognized and thanked the many citizens who came out today to gather outside
peacefully, safely and respectfully with messages such as kindness is not exclusive, Edmonds is for
everyone, support housing diversity and affordability in Edmonds, love thy neighbor no matter their credit
score, affordable housing now, be civil, and many messages stating that Black lives matter. She thanked
them for remaining respectful to all the members of communities and respectful of the fact that we are still
in the middle of a pandemic.
Councilmember Distelhorst expressed concern with the large crowd in Council Chambers last week that
was largely unmasked and a news article that a large crowd at a Lynnwood City Council meeting resulted
in a COVID exposure. He hoped unmasked people who were in close quarters at last week's meeting had
been or would get tested to ensure there were no exposure events last week. Case rates for Snohomish
County are very high again and he encouraged the public to get vaccinated, get tested if they were feeling
sick and go through the proper contract tracing protocol. He cautioned it could get bad again if people are
not taking the necessary precautions which statistics say they aren't.
Student Rep Roberts reported not surprisingly COVID cases continue to rise; recently released statistics
from the Snohomish Health District show the county has 198/100,000 people, higher than when the
pandemic began in March 2020. People need to wear marks indoors again and everyone needs to get
vaccinated. A year and a half into the pandemic and it still hasn't been controlled. Individualism needs to
be put aside and we need to work together as a community to end this once and for all. Business owners are
struggling, kids are struggling with learning, healthcare workers are scared for their lives; to act carefree is
an insult to them.
Student Representative Roberts was appalled at what he saw last week, behavior that was disgraceful,
uncivil and embarrassing. He rewatched the public comment portion of the meeting and heard
Councilmembers called a cancer, communist, Nazi, Marxist and fascist. Many members of the public have
children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews; he asked if they would be proud to have them see that behavior
and if it was behavior they wanted to model to youth. He pointed out what the public said last week was a
permanent record and will be kept by the City according to the Open Public Meetings Act and anyone
including potential clients, employers and education institutions can go to the recording and watch. He was
found it unbelievable that a teenager had to tell this to grown adults; watch what you say and do, calm
down, think before you act, be civil and be an example for everyone in Edmonds.
With regard to the anti -hate portal, Student Representative Roberts asked what other way there was to
document incidents of hate, discrimination and bias. How could his mom report being called a racial slur
multiple times while walking. These incidents cannot go unreported; it is up to us to call it out and end it.
He reported he had a fun time Sunday immersing himself in African American culture with Councilmember
Distelhorst at the Nubian Jam Festival in Everett. People exposing themselves to different cultures is critical
to learning the importance of different perspectives and diversity and he hoped Edmonds would have a
similar event in the future.
Student Representative Roberts announced the Youth Commission is seeking applicants for four open
positions. Applications are available on the Youth Commission page on the City's website. High school
students are encouraged to get involved and apply. He gave a big kudos to Edmonds Police Department
officers for serving the community in an empathetic and professional way throughout the pandemic. He
rode along with two officers and saw the work of another officer and was impressed with how they handled
situations involving danger, individuals in crisis and traffic stops. He was also stoked to see the
collaboration with human services. As the City heads into the selection of the new chief of p- "(-e_ he
reminded everyone to treat each other with kindness. Everyone wants what's best for Edmonds
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 25
to us to foster civil and constructive discussions. As Abraham Lincoln once said, a house divided cannot
stand. Be kind, keep wearing masks indoors, wear sunscreen and enjoy the beautiful weather while it lasts.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO
EXTEND FOR 5 ADDITIONAL MINUTES TO 10:25 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.)
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson said he wanted to comment on what happened at last week's City Council meeting, but he
wanted to wait until after the polls closed because there is some relevancy. Last week packing of the Council
Chamber was part of an organized effort by a partisan campaign to bully and harass specific elected officials
and City staff by a local City Council candidate's campaign. They began gathering outside at 5:00 and were
seen drinking beforehand. These candidate supporters called elected officials fascists, communists, and
even identified the personal vehicle of a Councilmember they targeted. They repeatedly called out their
opponent and the candidate's campaign manager shouted and pointed from the podium that he was coming
after Councilmembers. They threated and demonized City staff and certain elected officials.
Mayor Nelson referred to civility, pointing out there is a difference between expressing anger over
neighborhood traffic problems and calling democratic elected officials Nazis. There was no condemnation
or apology from the candidate for this extremist conduct, but equally as troubling was the silence of current
and former elected officials and many members of the community who support this candidate. He asked
where was the civil police, the moral outrage from the civic leaders thumping their chests for non-
partisanship and civility. Their lack of public condemnation clearly demonstrates this type of conduct meets
their approval. If one choses to be kind only to people they agree with and not those they do not agree with,
it defeats the purpose. Selected civility is not civility. Last week's Council meeting ended with some
Councilmembers thanking these extremists for their comments.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, commenting elected officials were not allowed to talk about
elections during campaign season and even though the primary election is over, it is still campaign season.
Mayor Nelson said he was not talking about any elections, he was now talking about the reporting hate
portal.
Mayor Nelson said long after the hate rallies are gone, the hate work must continue. Rallies alone will not
change someone's hatred of someone else. The best way to inform the community is to have something
they can be informed about and that is data. Many organizations have studied this issue; he quoted from a
report, Policy Spotlight: Hate Crime Laws, whose partners included the Anti -Defamation League, the
Matthew Shepherd Foundation, the Southern Poverty Law Center, National Council of Jewish Women and
many others, "improving data collection can help connect people impacted by hate crimes to resources and
support. More robust data can also support more tailored responses to hate violence, tracking potential
disparities or bias, and enforcement of hate crime laws and evaluate the efficiency of responses to hate
crimes. For any such data collection to occur, individuals who experience hate crimes must chose to report
these experiences. The process for reporting hate crimes should be as simple and safe as possible. Programs
like community or state hotlines where people can report their experiences and be directed to available
resources can help lower obstacles to reporting and increasing access to needed support."
Mayor Nelson said the problem is not that there is too much reporting to government; the problem is there
is there are not enough people reporting. Yet in Edmonds people seem to be outraged that the City is trying
to collect data. A CNN story last year entitled, "Why Hate Crime Data Can't Capture the True Scope of
Anti -Asian Violence" reported that victims of hate crimes are often unlikely to report to the police due to
long standing distrust of law enforcement, language barriers, and immigration status are all deterrents for
reporting a crime. There are community members who say stop Asian hate but don't make it easier to report
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 26
Asian -hate incidents. A Police Chief magazine stated "the hate crime reporting gap; low numbers keep
tensions high. From Ronald Davis, Director, Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented
Policing, "250,000 hate crime victims each year and only a third of them reported. There are more victims
than there are crimes reported." How do we know that? One of the most accurate surveys done by the
Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Crime Victimization Survey, tells us that.
There are exponentially so many more people who are victims of these crimes and they are not reporting
them.
Instead of being outraged for not doing more to make it easier to report the incidents, Mayor Nelson said
the City is ridiculed and condemned for making it easy to report something that is known to be hard to
report. Nazi swastikas recently appeared in a neighborhood park. City government officials and staff were
called Nazis for trying to make it easier to report on Nazis which he said did not make any sense. Hate
crimes are one of the most unreported in our-eountry, yet some citizens are making a mockery of attempting
to address the real problem facing every community. He hoped Council and community members would
condemn this extremist, divisive behavior in all its forms moving forward. He will not be silenced by those
who want to pedal fear and intimidation and will continue to be the voice for those who do not have a voice.
Everyone needs to be civil whether they are doing political rhetoric or not and what was demonstrated last
week was not political rhetoric, it was uncivil behavior that has no place in Council Chambers. The City
has made it easy to report hate incidents and he believed the portal would be kept up and running for as
long as needed.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
M!C AEL NELSON, MAYOR
kotr PASS EY, Cl CL R
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 27
Public Comment for 8/3/21 Council Meeting:
From: edmondskar@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 2:59 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Letter for City Council Meeting 8/3/21 regarding Trees
I am writing regarding the Landmark Tree Emergency Ordinance extension which will be
discussed at tonight's City Council meeting. In the Council Agenda Packet I did not see a
reference to how long this extension is proposed for. As you will recall, the Emergency
Ordinance went into effect March 2, 2021 with an expiration date of September 2,
2021. The Council has had 6 months to deliberate on this. Homeowners that did not rush
to have their trees taken down immediately upon hearing of the proposed Ordinance, have
now had 6 months to wait for Council's decision.
I believe that the tree ordinance is best addressed as two separate issues - one with
developers that have purchased a lot(s) for the purpose of developing it, and one for
homeowners that wish to exercise their private property rights and remove a tree(s).
Issue 1 -Landmark Trees situated on property proposed to be developed. Approve an
extension if needed to make an informed, considered decision, and generate language to
ensure the parameters for tree removal are as stringent as possible to retain our tree
canopy. Developers do not have a stake in retaining individual trees like homeowners
do. They are not considering the benefits of beauty and livability to a neighborhood. For
them it is strictly a financial decision - less trees means more space to build larger or more
homes. It appears that it is the developers who are removing the majority of the trees on
a lot. Furthermore, as has been observed in other areas that have imposed a choice of
replacement trees or penalty fees of some sort on developers - the developers primarily
choose to pay the penalty.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-struck-a-grand-barizain-on-
housin -now-cit -hall-is-reviewin -the-initial-results
The City is satisfied as it receives payment for the trees it has allowed them to remove and
can then use those penalties in any green projects of their choosing, while the Developers
are happy as they can develop the property and pass the cost of the penalties on to the
next buyer - only the residents of the Neighborhood and beyond are unhappy because they
know that the developers will remove as many trees as they can to achieve housing
density, causing increased traffic, congestion and lowering livability in the City.
Issue 2. Landmark Trees Situated on Private Residential Lots proposed to be cut down or
topped by homeowners for their own personal reasons not financial gain.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 28
There should be no extension beyond September 2nd. Council should instead immediately
withdraw all restrictions to the removal of trees by homeowners, allowing personal
property rights to prevail, and homeowners to make their own personal decisions as to
the trees on their property. Or to quote William Blackstone, eminent English jurist, 1723-
1780, "So great moreover is the regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize
the least violation of it; no, not even for the general good of the entire community"
Homeowners are distinguished from developers in that their motivation for tree cutting is
typically generated by personal preferences and needs for the use and enjoyment of their
own property and is restricted to one or two trees not wholesale removal. Developers on
the other hand do not have personal attachments to the property, but instead base their
decisions on financial reasons. In the homeowners case, they have often times planted
these trees themselves or they were located on the property when they purchased
it. Regardless, it is usually a case of one or two trees on the property that are being
considered for removal because they are not the right tree in the right place, have grown
taller than anticipated, the homeowner is concerned about trees falling in a wind storm, or
that the tree shedding or causing moss could reduce the life expectancy of a roof, resulting
in a new roof earlier than anticipated, which would increase the carbon footprint and
climate change.
This is not a decision that should involve the City. Homeowners are quite capable of
reviewing the issues and making the right decision for themselves and their
property. Further, homeowners should not be asked to pay for the privilege of the City
taking away property rights by paying the City for every tree that is cut down. The tree
canopy is very important and many homeowners will factor that in to their decisions. But
just as the city does not involve itself in other individual ecological decisions such as a
homeowner's purchase of a hybrid car versus a gasoline only car, an all grass lawn versus
native plant groundcovers, asphalt driveways versus permeable surface driveways for
instance, so too it should not encroach on the individual's property rights involving trees or
vegetation on a private homeowner's property unless in the case of safety
In addition, the City has been concerned regarding the availability of affordable
housing. Whether a new buyer or existing homeowner, the costs of paying for an arborist
and permits just to cut down a tree, or the accelerated replacement of a roof due to tree
damage, will add to the cost of a property and further reduce its affordability
Lest you mistake me for a tree hater not a tree lover, I would like to share that when I
moved to my current home in Edmonds 15 years ago the property had one tree and 3
shrubs. It has been transformed into a certified backyard wildlife habitat with literally
hundreds of plants and trees, with an emphasis on natives. But, private property rights are
sacrosanct and any attempt to diminish them is best scrutinized very closely.
Thank you.
Kathy Ryan, Edmonds Resident
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 29
From: Cynthia Sjoblom
Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 9:01 PM
To: Johnson, Laura <Laura.Johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: RE: SOUNDING THE ALARM BELL ABOUT CITY COUNCIL
LAURA- I know you got in touch today with that constituent because of my comments. It is
nothing short of disingenuous (lacking in frankness, insincere) for you to try and spin this. It is
not possible because I know the facts. It was not only WHAT you SAID, but HOW you TREATED
your constituent. It's too late for you to spin this to suit your own ends.. The best you should be
doing is apologizing for how you reacted.
I can't accept your response as total truth because I know what happened.
If it was true that you "had not yet found the appropriate words to respond to their email" that
was all you needed to say to your constituent in a KIND MANNER and you should have done
that in a manner in keeping with the code of conduct and the laws that govern your actions.
Lastly, it is highly inappropriate to be making decisions for the constituents that favors
whatever the herd council wants. You don't represent the others on council or the mayor, you
represent the people of this city!
Simply going along with others to appease them is absolutely unconscionable (unscrupulous,
not guided by conscience), and not only that, you would be complicit in violating the laws and
codes of our city as well. One must stand up for the truth to such individuals and if you don't,
you end up as collateral damage. Currently, the council and the Mayor are trying to make the
citizens the collateral damage of all decisions being made by our government officials. This
cannot continue.
Cynthia Sjoblom
P.s Please have all the chairs put back in the council meeting room because it violates the will
of the people who want to be together. Apparently, there is some censorship going on because
the applause was cut from the video. This city government is doing anything and everything to
try and shut the will of the constituents down. This is absolutely unacceptable and again, it
violates "respecting the rights of the citizens"! There is no reason to make changes from the
previous meeting because it does not violate any state laws and no one is stating that we have
to be 6 feet apart any longer. Council are protected behind shields and are well beyond 6 feet
from the constituents.
This government had better stop their tactics against the Constituents. I have never met a more
flagrant group of people defying their constituents wishes. I am absolutely appalled as are
others.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 30
From: Theresa Hutchison
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 20219:33 AM
To: Ken Reidy <kenreidy@hotmail.com>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>;
Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Re: Public Comments for the August 3, 2021 City Council Meeting
Thank you Ken for this well thought out and reasonable new Rule of Procedure.
I hope City Council gives this serious consideration.
Theresa Campa Hutchison
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 9:26 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>;
Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for the August 3, 2021 City Council Meeting
Should City Council adopt new Rules of Procedure, please make sure such includes the
following new Rule. The reason for adding this new Rule is so that citizens of Edmonds who
make the effort to provide Public Comment to City Council get the last word before decisions
are made by City Council. New Rule:
If the City Attorney or City Staff speak specific to a Citizen Public Comment AFTER the Public
Comment is made, the Citizen will be granted one additional minute to speak. The City
Attorney or City Staff are not allowed to make the final comments to City Council specific to a
Citizen Public Comment that has been made during an Open Public Meeting. If the City
Attorney or City Staff speak specific to a Citizen Public Comment AFTER the one additional
minute has been granted, the Citizen will again be granted one additional minute to
speak. This process will repeat until the Citizen is provided the opportunity to make the final
comments before decisions are made by City Council.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 31
Thank you in advance for adding this Rule as it is very important.
Please see my Public Comments submitted for the Public Hearing for Ordinance 4217. Once
again, the Agenda Packet provided City Council is incomplete.
Finally, please take the opportunity of this Council Meeting (whether it is held on Monday or
Tuesday) to get the questions about the true Effective Date for Ordinances figured out once
and for all. Are there any votes whatsoever subject to a super majority vote? If so, why isn't
that discussed in the proposed Council Rules of Procedures. After all these years, I also think it
possible that none of our Ordinances shall go into effect before thirty days from the time of
final passage. The reason for this is we adopted the powers of initiative and referendum in
1985. Please read the related RCW and see what you think:
RCW 35A.11.090
Initiative and referendum —Effective date of ordinances —Exceptions.
Ordinances of noncharter code cities the qualified electors of which have elected to
exercise the powers of initiative and referendum shall not go into effect before thirty days from
the time of final passage and are subject to referendum during the interim except:
(1) Ordinances initiated by petition;
(2) Ordinances necessary for immediate preservation of public peace, health, and safety
or for the support of city government and its existing public institutions which contain a
statement of urgency and are passed by unanimous vote of the council;
(3) Ordinances providing for local improvement districts;
(4) Ordinances appropriating money;
(5) Ordinances providing for or approving collective bargaining;
(6) Ordinances providing for the compensation of or working conditions of city
employees; and
(7) Ordinances authorizing or repealing the levy of taxes; which excepted ordinances
shall go into effect as provided by the general law or by applicable sections of Title 35A RCW as
now or hereafter amended.
From: finis tupper
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 4:35 PM
To: Paine, Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 32
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Code of Ethics
Hi Susan:
In your best interests, you shouldn't vote in favor of the proposed Code of Ethics. Unless, you
are going to change your current modus operandi and respond to citizen questions and emails.
You have constitently demonstrated your unwillingness to "keep the community informed on
municipal affairs and encourage communications between the citizens and all municipal
officers. Emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public and each other; seek to
improve the quality of public and confidence of citizens".
Finis Tupper
From: finis tupper
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 7:40 AM
To: Paine, Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Interim Ordinance 4210
Dear Council President Paine:
Thank you for your comments expressing your appreciation of the public participation and the
public testimony at the Council meeting last evening.
My concern is about Interim Ordinance 4210 for Outdoor Dining and the required public
hearing not being properly scheduled. Also I have concerns about City Staff and City Attorney's
answers to the City Council regarding the Sunset clause (Section 3.) in Ord. 4210. The Planning
Board Meeting minutes do not memorialize staff telling them this was a new ordinance for
code changes. RCW 36.70A.390, titled Interim zoning controls — Public Hearing — Limitations on
length — Excerptions is unambiguous stating after passage of an interim ordinance the
governing body shall hold a public hearing on the proposed Interim zoning within at least 60
days of its adoption. The City Council passed the ordinance without a public hearing on
December 15, 2020. A City Council public hearing was required February 12, 2021. Section 3.
states; the interim ordinance shall remain in effect for 180 days from the effective date
(December 15, 2020) and not 5 days from publication effective date of December 23, 2020.
Please note Section 4. Emergency Declaration states this ordinance will take effect immediately
upon passage not 8 days after passage. City Staff and you should have been very well aware of
the public hearing requirement because the Planning Board recommendation provided the city
was "hold future public hearings as needed (circa Feb 2)". The question for your legal counsel
is: "what is status of the Outdoor Dining permits issued by staff from December 15, 2020 to the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 33
current date. Mr. Taraday stonewalling Councilmember Olson's request for the legal opinion is
continued demonstration of his inexcusable and unacceptable legal malfeasance. As the
interim ordinance that wasn't properly scheduled for a City Council public hearing.
By the way, Councilmember Buckshnis misstated the dates; the ordinance was 224 days old and
not 277 days. The 77 days from passage referred to a previous interim ordinance that wasn't
properly scheduled for a City Council public hearing. At that Council Meeting then Council
President Fraley-Monillas stated the City would take steps to ensure the mistake wouldn't
occur in the future.
Who is responsible for this interim ordinance's public hearing not being schedule within 60 days
of passage? Is it the office of the Council President? One of your responsibilities is the setting of
the weekly Council Agenda. If not you, who would you blame, the Mayor, the City Attorney, the
Planning Director or the City Clerk? Can you please contact Councilmember Fraley-Monillas to
determine what action steps she took to prevent this mistake and advise me of the steps taken
by her.
The primary purpose of this interim ordinance is to eliminate the Conditional Use Permit which
requires and application and a Hearing Examiner hearing. An "Outdoor Dining" permit is not an
allow use by right in any business zone but rather a use that requires discretionary hearing
examiner conditional approval after a public hearing. In other words Outdoor Dining is an
exception to the current zoning code. If the use is objectionable to surrounding property
owners they should have the right to testify at public hearing and have their concerns
addressed without the cost of having to appeal the permit or filing a LUPA lawsuit.
Public participation and involvement in our government is what democracy is all about. If you
favor public participation and testimony you should not vote in favor of these zoning changes
to ECDC Chapter 17 for outdoor dining. The staff should not be making these kinds of decisions
absent citizen involvement in the decision -making process.
Sincerely,
Finis Tupper
From: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 20219:23 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>
Subject: My 7-27-2021 comments to Mayor Nelson and Council
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 34
Mayor and Council,
The second paragraph of the United States Declaration of Independence begins: Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
Recent actions have been taken without the consent of the governed.
On the third of May, on myedmondsnews, the Mayor outlined measures to address hate, after
swastikas were found on Southwest County Park trees. A measure to be instituted was:
Park surveillance cameras
The City is researching the placement of night vision "game cameras," on and in trails and parks
in the City. The purpose of these cameras in public areas is to deter criminal behavior and to
potentially aid in the apprehension of those committing crimes. Signage would be posted at
entrance and egress points notifying people using the parks that, due to factors of protection
and safety, those entering may be subject to surveillance.
Surveillance is the chief strategy of authoritarian and fascist governments to control their
citizens. Do a Web search of China and surveillance to find the current creepiest example.
Mayor Nelson is moving forward with a surveillance plan to protect us. From what? Graffiti?
The second action was announced by the city on July 19: a new online portal "to report
incidents of bias, discrimination and hate".
Ken Reidy questioned Mayor Nelson, Council member Distelhorst (who is liaison to the Diversity
Commission) and Patrick Doherty regarding the representation that the Diversity Commission
had recommended this action. Patrick Doherty's response was:
The idea for the bias/hate reporting portal came out of preliminary discussions among
Commissioners —not a formal recommendation. These discussions led me, as staff, to discuss
this idea internally and we decided that it was a good idea that we could implement without
further ado. We simply added to the existing reporting portal on our website a new category:
"incidents of bias, discrimination and/or hate."
Council member Distelhorst praised this reporting portal at the July 20 Council meeting and
suggested "robust distribution out to the community."
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 35
Mayor Nelson and Council Member Distelhorst: you don't fight authoritarian sentiments with
authoritarian pratices. Surveillance by governments is intimidation. You know who practices
intimidation? Bullies, gangs and hate groups. If those in this room employ the tactics of bullies,
gangs, and hate groups, you won't have to set up cameras outside this room to find them.
Joan Bloom
Former Edmonds City Council member 2012-2015
Joan Bloom
Edmonds is a gift. Let's show our appreciation.
From: Janet L. Smith
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 8:41 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: 7-27-2021 Public Hearing on Outdoor Dining
I am an Edmonds resident and a small business owner. I wanted to give my comments about
the expanded outside dining in Edmonds, because I am a person who regularly comes
downtown and patronizes the businesses, services and restaurants. I am concerned that when
comments are submitted virtually or through Letters to the Editor, that many of the people
commenting are not those who actually come downtown on a regular basis.
In the past year and a half since COVID, I have come to the bowl to dine out or shop 1-2 times a
week. I regularly visit and make purchases at the shops in the bowl.
I have not had trouble parking on weekends within a block or two of my destination. The city
has done a good job opening up the bank parking lots, and ADA spots at city hall. .
What I've observed when I come to downtown Edmonds on the weekend is a vibrant, walkable
community filled with people of all ages having fun. Even with the expanded seating, it can be
hard to get a seat at a restaurant downtown on a Friday or Saturday evening. My husband and I
always choose outdoor dining over indoors. In the summer, its just more pleasant to be
outdoors.
Last weekend, we invited friends from Yakima to visit Walkable Main Street with us, listen to
the jazz bands and have dinner and drinks. They had never been to Edmonds before, and
couldn't stop talking about what a magical place it was. I'm sure they'll be back.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 36
We hear a lot about how the retail business in the bowl has been down. But is lack of parking
really the issue? Many of the shops in town carry high end clothing and shoes. The folks I know
were working from home and wearing yoga pants and slippers. Some of the stores have
beautiful items for decor and entertaining, but we haven't been inviting anyone into our
homes. My point is, before we automatically assume that parking is responsible for any
business losses, and that bringing back the parking spots would magically return the status quo,
we need to also consider the changes in shopping patterns.
As a small business owner, I know that change is not easy. But businesses need to be resilient
and flexible enough to adapt to whatever comes along.
I urge the City Council to create a comprehensive plan for downtown that includes keeping the
"streeteries." They are fun and festive, and attract people to the bowl as a destination. In my
opinion, attracting more people downtown is good for everyone.
Janet L. Smith
Edmonds, WA
From: Kim Bayer
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2021 11:33 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: RE: CHC Policies being presented at 3/16 Council Meeting
Edmonds City Council,
I spoke tonight at the council meeting during Audience comments. I had planned to speak
during the public hearing on Unit Lot Sub -division but, had to leave because of the lengthy
delay upfront. Because I was unable to speak to my talking points earlier, I've attached them as
a reference.
Why didn't our city leadership plan ahead to make sure the technology was working
properly? Good leadership would have made this happen knowing this was going to be a very
large and contentious meeting. We almost thought this was planned so you wouldn't have to
face the music after hiding all these months behind so many Zoom calls. Please know it is just
another embarrassment for the current city leadership. Mayor Nelson, you are ultimately
accountable for assuring Edmonds city meetings occur properly, and that city staff are doing
their jobs.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 37
Beyond these numerous mis-steps that continually occur under this city government, the staff
should be your number one concern. THEY ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS. If the majority of you;
or, city staff I've encountered, were in the corporate sector, they would be fired
immediately. Again, please remember who is at the top of the org chart (see attached as a
reminder).
Adrienne, I will call you out on this one because I just witnessed (online) your pathetic closing
comments. The reason people call Luke and you out is because of your extremely poor
decision -making and support of idiotic policies and agendas that do not uphold making
Edmonds "the Gem of Puget Sound" (phrase in the city comp plan that needs to apply for all
decision -making). You are not being bullied. Residents I speak with think you don't belong on
the council anymore. Your comments were just another insult to injury. Please get out of your
bubble and actually speak to people who care about Edmonds.
On a lighter note, I would like to thank all of you for delaying any decisions on housing and
specifically, Unit Lot Sub -Division. I'm on the ADB and voted no with the Chair based of the lack
of open space this approach will create. I also voted no because the developer bullied his way
to state that he would build a much less desirable building if he didn't get approval. If you want
to target bullying, look into this guy. He's from Seattle and was extremely rude to our Chair,
including anyone making comments or, had questions that did not support his plan for the
Baskins and Robbins site. This is because he knew if he opened the door, he would be allowed
to replicate this all over Edmonds.
PLEASE listen to your citizens (not through surveys as the data can be manipulated) and DO THE
RIGHT THING!
Thank you,
Kim
Unit Lot Sub -Division Code Amendment Meeting for 7/27 Council Meeting
Good evening. My name is Kim Augustavo. I'm a 40 year resident of Edmonds
I've been involved in corporate politics for many years during my career but, I've never engaged
directly with our city politics until this past year. Why now? Because myself, along with many
other citizens, decided we had to get involved and fight the bureaucracy of poor decision
making and frankly, utter disrespect for the citizens point of view. Please know these remarks
apply to the block of four and the mayor. In my hand, is a copy of the current city of Edmonds
Org chart. Do you know who is at the top? It is all of Us ... the citizens. This is WHO YOU ARE
ELECTED TO SERVE. Please keep this top of mind when you move forward on anything related
to housing; especially changing or amending codes.
It's become clear this didn't happen with the CHC policy plan as it was staff led, and influenced
to gain a pre -determined outcome. You all know the 15 policies were approved by just 1 vote
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 38
to gain a simple majority and that several of these policies went against what the majority of
citizens want to see happen. Not one citizen I know, and; I know a lot, want more concrete,
and less green. That's what unit lot subdivision will create. Additionally....
If you approve the code amendment before you tonight to allow unit -lot sub -divisions in the BD
zone, you will be violating the city comp plan. How?
The "Gem of Puget Sound" is a phrase highlighted in the city comp plan. Unit Lot Sub -Division
will not support this statement because it allows developers to build higher density where
there will be more concrete and elimination of open space because developers will get around
the 5% required by just simply dividing lots. Once you open pandora's box and allow this code
amendment to pass, you will quickly see a transformed downtown Edmonds with less open
space.
Second reason you need to wait is: Approving this amendment now creates a "Piece -Meal"
approach to managing increased density. The comp plan specifically calls out on page 1 to
avoid using a "piece -meal" approach. Bottom line....
Unit Lot Sub -Division needs to be delayed to ensure it fits within the overarching strategic
framework of the CHC plan. This amendment should not stand alone. Now I'm asking all of you
to please do the right thing!
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 39
2021 Adopted Budget
City of Edmonds, Washington
2021 Organization Chart
13
City of Edmonds,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 2021
Page 40