cmd100521
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
October 5, 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
STAFF PRESENT
Dave Turley, Finance Director
Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember L. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: “We acknowledge
the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We
respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection
with the land and water.”
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES DAY PROCLAMATION
Mayor Nelson read a proclamation proclaiming October 5, 2021 as Indigenous Peoples Day in Edmonds.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked Mayor Nelson for the proclamation. She recalled in 2017 when
it was changed from Columbus Day, there was a movement that included an indigenous person or
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 2
someone who belonged to a tribe interested in keeping both Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples Day
but Mayor Nelson in his wisdom moved forward with Indigenous People’s Day.
2. ARTS COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT
Cultural Services Manager Frances Chapin introduced Edmonds Arts Commission Chair Rhonda
Soikowski. She advised the packet includes the 2019 report which was not presented to Council in 2020.
This is a perfect month to give the EAC annual report as October is Arts and Humanities month, a
national designation.
EAC Chair Soikowski explained 2020 started strong, close to 100 people came to the Wintergrass Music
at the Library event and there was a successful new film program with movies shown at the library based
on books followed by moderated discussion. Due to the onset and spread of COVID-19, the Best Book I
Ever Read Poster Contest and Concerts in the Parks were canceled in 2020 and the EAC had to go back to
the drawing board to determine how to maintain access to the arts for Edmonds residents during the
pandemic. She reviewed:
Best Book I Ever Read Poster Contest for 3rd graders
o Canceled in 2020
o Event restructured in 2021 and offered to 3rd graders in an online format
Online Poster Gallery and On the Fence exhibit
Local artists created “How to Make a Poster” videos
Zoom presentation by author Avril van der Merwe
Online awards ceremony
Summer Concerts 2020: 5 free online concerts
Summer Concerts 2021: Return of live music performances allowing for smaller crowds and
social distancing
o Walkable Main
o Hazel Miller Plaza
o Uptown Evening Market
o Total of 40 live events
Community Impact: Pandemic
o Focus for maintaining community interest in and forward movement in the Creative District
moved specifically into branding and marketing
o 2020 – increased funding for Tourism Promotion grants, but organizations hampered as
venues and live events/performances shut down in March.
o EAC programs such as Concerts in the Park and Music at the Library were canceled
o Write on the Sound conference revenues, typically used to supplement general fund support
for EAC programs, down almost 40%
o 2021 – EAC implemented grant program for arts nonprofits to expand access to arts and
culture
o Preferred options explored for 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor – adopted by City Council
Write on the Sound (WOTS)
o In 2020 EAC reimaged WOTS as an online conference
o Continued as online event in 2021 due to positive feedback regarding 2020 online event as
well as questions and fear of the spread of delta variant.
37th annual WOTS concluded last weekend.
- Nationally known, award-winning novelist Lisa See as keynote
- 18 sessions
- 120 attendees
- 30% from other states and 3 other countries
Civic Park Public Art
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 3
o In April 2020, a public art process selected five finalists to be considered for creating
artwork at the new Civic Park.
o Process put on hold during the pandemic, restarted fall 2021
o All finalists interviewed at public meeting
o One artist will soon be recommended to City Council to develop designs for artwork in a
process that will include additional community input
2021 Commissioners
o Rhonda J Soikowski, Chair
o Patricia Oneill, Vice Chair
o Richard Chung
o Lesly Kaplan, WOTS Chair
o Lisa Palmatier
o Tanya Sharp
o Ashley Song
o Georgia Livesey, Student Representative
EAC Chair Soikowski thanked the Council for the opportunity to present and for their ongoing support of
the arts in the community.
Councilmember Olson recognized the EAC for pivoting to the Art on the Fence installation for the Best
Book I Ever Read Contest which she was sure people loved seeing. She thanked Ms. Soikowski for
serving as EAC Chair and also thanked retiring 2020 Chair Marni Muir.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested Ms. Chapin send the PowerPoint to the Council. Ms. Chapin
agreed to send it, noting the packet also includes the full 2020 and 2019 reports.
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the EAC for going back to the drawing board, finding it very notable
that the EAC provided 40 live music events this summer and pivoted so the majority of events could be
outside or online. Everybody enjoys the arts but even more so now that the ability to be social in a way
that is safe enough is key. The City recognized September as Suicide Prevention Month and the positive
effect of music mental health are well known. She thanked the EAC for providing those performances,
particularly during these times.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked the EAC for continuing the Best Book I Ever Read Contest. He
appreciated the EAC bringing music and art to the Uptown Market and voiced his support for continuing
ongoing public art. He noted the City’s public art map is very downtown bowl centric and voiced his
support for more live music, art events, and public art installations throughout the City.
Council President Paine asked about the EAC’s plans for 2022. Chair Soikowski answered the
commission is discussing some exciting things but they have not been solidified. Ms. Chapin said Chair
Soikowski and EAC member Lesly Kaplan have been talking about doing something with poetry. The
EAC is hoping in 2022 to have poetry posted at three sites, similar to the On the Fence exhibits. That has
not been totally defined but the EAC is interested in including sites outside the bowl. The EAC is also
working on the 2022 WOTS; there may be an opportunity to do it in-person but the EAC learned there are
a lot of benefits for attendees to participate via Zoom. She summarized there are some exciting things in
the future in addition to public art. Council President Paine commented she comes from a family that has
always appreciated art and she has over 10,000 hours in museums and concert halls. She recognized the
value of having active volunteers in the community.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she had the pleasure during the last couple of years of working with Ms.
Chapin, the selection committee and artists for the new Civic Park public art. The committee saw
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 4
presentations from many artists which was very exciting. Five finalists were chosen who were
interviewed by the selection committee last week and a consensus was reached about the artist to bring
forward. The next step is going to the EAC and then to City Council. She thanked Ms. Chapin for
including her in that process. Ms. Chapin said it was a pleasure to have Councilmember K. Johnson on
the selection panel. She will make a presentation to Council committee next week.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO ADD TO THE AGENDA AFTER ITEM 5, A PRESENTATION FROM THE
MAYOR NELSON ON THE 2022 BUDGET AS A COURTESY TO BOTH THE COUNCIL AND
THE PUBLIC.
Councilmember K. Johnson noted in the past during the Earling administration there had always been a
presentation to Council on the budget and she would appreciate a similar presentation tonight.
Councilmember Distelhorst advised the presentation was live streamed last night and he watched a
recording on YouTube. There are also links to the budget book and decision packages in an email sent to
Council. He summarized he did not need to watch the video again and if he needed to, he could watch it
on YouTube.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she also watched it today; it is available online if anyone wanted to
see it.
Councilmember Olson said she understood Councilmember K. Johnson’s point and she had not seen the
email with the links. She happened to catch it, recalling it had been on the calendar for an hour, but
conflicted with a special Council meeting. Councilmember K. Johnson’s point was that having the
Council expressly invited would have been appreciated.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not receive an email and did not hear until 5:15 p.m. tonight that
it was presented yesterday. It is beneficial for the public to see the presentation because many more
people watch Council meetings than go to YouTube. She will gladly watch it if there are links available.
In the interest of transparency, it would be helpful to have the Mayor’s budget presentation at a Council
meeting.
Council President Paine said she watched the video earlier today so did not need to have it presented
again. She encouraged Councilmembers to watch it, noting the budget season will begin soon and there
likely will be a lot of questions.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she could understand that some people may have missed it, lives are very
busy which is the reason for having it recorded on Facebook Live and as a YouTube video. The Council’s
agendas are very full and often the Council struggles to get to everything. She was uncertain that
replicating something that was already available as a video recording was necessarily more beneficial
than getting through the agenda. She suggested identifying for the public how to access the video,
anticipating that would suffice as well as ensure the Council could get through its agenda.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she was not asking for a one hour presentation, just the budget message
which in the past has been 1-2 pages. It would take five minutes, probably less time than this discussion.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 5
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the budget message was done on online last year as well. Mayor
Nelson agreed it was. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said this was not something brand new. She was
not paying attention until today, but was able to see it. She did not think there was a 1-2 page document
that would characterize everything in the budget. She assumed during the budget process that department
heads will describe their requests and discussions will still occur but there will not be the perhaps
antiquated long explanation that takes up time at a Council meeting versus watching it online.
Councilmember L. Johnson said anyone who is interested in watching it can go to
Edmondswa.gov/government/communications; it is available both as a video speech as well as text
according to the webpage.
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 MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO
ADD AGENDA ITEM 11, EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH RCW 42.30.110(1)(F)
TO RECEIVE AND EVALUATE COMPLAINTS OR CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST A
PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
Councilmember Distelhorst commented there are still two hours of items on the hours on agenda, taking
the meeting to 9:30 p.m. Given the Council’s track record of extending beyond 10 p.m., he asked if this
was urgent or could it be taken up at a future meeting when there was more room. Councilmember Olson
said there was likely to be time tonight, it could be pushed off but she would rather have it on tonight’s
agenda as it was old business that should move forward.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAINE, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD “IF TIME ALLOWS.”
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented on the need for the Council to give themselves flexibility,
because when meetings last until 10:30 p.m., the Council does not always make the best decisions nor are
they thinking clearly that late at night. She noted the issue prior to the proposed executive session is
related to South County Fire which will require a great deal of attention. She did not object to having an
executive session, but if it got too late tonight, she supported delaying it until next week.
Councilmember Olson offered a friendly amendment to have the executive session before the next
meeting if it did not happen tonight.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the Council has been having very long, extensive meetings for the
past 11 years, but she has never seen so many complaints about all the things the Council has to do in a
short amount of time; it happens and that is the Council’s work. She suggested respecting the
Councilmember who would like to have the executive session. If it happens at 10:30 p.m., then that is
when it happens. The Council should start respecting each other’s opinions about what is and is not
needed and the timeframe. She has had questions about some of the agendas over the past year such as
why the bike lanes are not on tonight’s agenda. She suggested Councilmembers quit talking about the
time and how full agendas are and just do their job and move forward.
Council President Paine said next week is committee meetings and there is already an executive session
on another matter either before or after committee meetings as well as potentially other agenda items. She
summarized next week will be a long meeting and the Council may need to be flexible.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 6
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST AND
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE
VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments.
Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, explained stormwater management is very important to the community
and expensive, but mostly for those wishing to build in Edmonds. As Mr. Williams stated at the last
Council meeting, everyone benefits from stormwater management regulations that new development
provides. As most requirements are already in place, she questioned whether it was necessary to also
greatly increase permit fees. Builders pay for engineering evaluations for increased flow and water
retention, grading and installation of stormwater retention sites at great expense. When Edmonds
arbitrarily increases permit fees, it looks like a money grab similar to the tree ordinance takings. Who
should absorb the penalties for all the tree removal in Edmonds and the lack of stormwater management
in Edmonds prior to 2021? The Edmonds City Council and Planning Department have determined the
burden should be placed mainly on those wishing to divide property to build single family homes. This is
discrimination; by law all should be treated equally. Many families have moved into the state, yet
Edmonds has greatly increased the cost of building and effectively halted the building of single family
homes via a permit moratorium, the taking of their trees forcing them to buy them back from the City
before they can make room to build homes, fluidly changing regulations, and increasing the costs of
permit fees even while all requirements are met. These actions motivate builders to build further out,
increasing urban sprawl, a direct violation of the GMA.
Ms. Ferkingstad continued, the cost to meet all of Edmonds’ regulations, tree takings and permit fees are
becoming a large percentage of the cost to build new homes. Arbitrarily raising the cost of homes with
permit fees and tree takings in areas zoned single family is the opposite of contributing to affordable
housing. If Edmonds no longer wants single family homes built on single family zoned properties, a
straightforward and legal approach should be taken to purchase the property instead of overcharging,
over-regulating and devaluing undeveloped single family zoned areas. This is a governmental taking by
ordinance, fees and regulatory actions and is illegal. She was also still waiting for the City Attorney
Taraday to publicly respond to the question asked months ago, is it legal to dictate what property owners
do with their own trees? She is still waiting for the Council to rescind the discriminatory and illegal tree
ordinance. She has spoken at every meeting but one in the past six months. Property owners pay property
taxes and when new homes are built, their taxes contribute 10 fold to the tax base. Increased property tax
income should be a factor when considering raising permit costs during development. Builders are
attempting to fulfill the needs of the community and should not be punished for doing so.
Susan Hughes, Edmonds, said she hadn’t gotten involved in Edmonds politics until she and many other
concerned citizens attended the July 27th meeting to express concern with the hate portal. The Mayor
could have listened to what people were saying and set up a discussion with concerned citizens; instead
he became vindictive that citizens were unhappy with his hate portal. She was appalled at his false
statements, false narrative, bullying and gaslighting of Edmonds citizens at the August 3rd Council
meeting. She hoped citizens would watch or read the comments made at the July 27th meeting and watch
or read the Mayor’s comments at the August 3rd meeting. Citizens need to be aware of what is going on
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 7
and the disrespect the Mayor showed citizens. On the heels of Mayor Nelson’s antics came
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas drinking on the job and then trying to justify it. Instead of apologizing to
citizens, she became vindictive and made false statements, tried to bully citizens who spoke up about
drinking on the job and then flashed an inappropriate hand symbol, two blatant code of conduct
violations. The Council’s code states personal, insulting or intimidating language, body language actions
are not allowed and states no signs of partiality, prejudice or disrespect should be evident on the part of
Councilmembers toward any individual participating in a public meeting.
Ms. Hughes continued, two Councilmembers tried to discuss Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ violations
at the September 28th Council meeting, and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas interrupted and bullied them
so now nothing is being done about her blatant conduct violations. There is no way to file complaints
against a Councilmember who violates the code of conduct. The City Council code of conduct is
evidentially meaningless and the Council may as well tear it up because it is not followed. She reported
on the hate portal, identifying threatening comments by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas but anticipated
that would be shoved under the rug. Citizens need to start attending Council meetings to become aware of
the inappropriate behavior of some Councilmembers and submit opinion pieces to My Edmonds News as
comments made at Council meetings are ignored, falsified or cause threatening behavior from
Councilmembers and the Mayor. The Mayor and Councilmembers need to work for citizens and should
be held accountable for their actions.
Carolyn Strong, Edmonds, recalled last week she shared the report she made to the hate portal and
never receiving a verification. Her report was regarding the hateful acts of Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas flashing a loser sign at her during Council comments regarding her drinking while voting on
City issues. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas also stated in a letter to the editor that she made up stories
which is slanderous. Ms. Strong said she felt threatened by a Councilmember publicly oppressing her. On
Wednesday, she received the following response from Patrick Doherty who apparently is the judge, jury
and problem solver on hate issues representing the City, “Thank you for the complaint report we received
Monday morning of this week. I noticed at last evening’s Council meeting that you expressed your
concerns and made your report verbally during the meeting. You have therefore already accomplished
one of the steps I would have done myself which would be to share your concerns with the
Councilmember. As to any further action or investigation on our part, you have laid bare the issue and
described the actions that you have concern about. There is no further investigation to be done. And as I
said, your sharing your concerns publicly with the Councilmember appears to have accomplished your
goal.”
Ms. Strong suggested, 1) having an auto response immediately after making a report to the hate portal so
victims know their report has been put on the government list of hate crimes, and 2) before reporting the
incident, have a checkbox asking if they expressed their displeasure to their oppressor and if checked, let
them know there is no need to file a complaint because the problem is now apparently solved and does
not warrant any investigation. She planned to a public records request to see if all complaints have been
handled in the same fashion as hers. Last week she took notice that no disciplinary action was taken
against Councilmember Fraley-Monillas. It is concerning that Councilmembers are accepting of such
displays of hate and bias as okay in Edmonds. She did not see how Councilmembers were working for the
people when they vote to not act against Councilmember Fraley-Monillas for her hateful and unethical
actions. It seemed political to her. With the now known acceptance of vulgar hand signals during
comments, her understanding was that goes both ways. It seems there is no breach of conduct for flashing
rude hand signals or drinking during Council meetings so the Council must agree that stopping an
audience member from doing so would be an outrageous act of bias. She thanked the Council for setting a
precedence on these issues and looked forward to seeing changes in the hate portal.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 8
7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DISTELHORST, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
PULL ITEM 7.5, DRAFT BOND ORDINANCE, AND MOVE IT TO THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is a transparency issue; there have been numerous email
discussions. Citizens do not look at Consent Agenda items. The bond ordinance is very important, tedious
and interesting, $10 million in refunding, restructuring and new bonds. The recommendation in the
agenda memo is for the Council to read the ordinance, but there is no Council procedure for putting items
on the Consent Agenda for informational purposes; typically items first go to a committee or a
presentation to Council. She preferred to have this reviewed by the Finance Committee as she had a
number of questions about the ordinance and the timing. If this amendment does not pass tonight, she will
put the ordinance on next week’s Finance Committee agenda.
Council President Paine said she would not object if this was added to tonight’s agenda for 10 minutes to
allow a quick discussion. The ordinance has been in the packet since Friday and everyone has had an
opportunity to review it. This can be a first reading and opportunity to ask questions. Once it is submitted
to the Council it belongs to the entire Council so it does not need to go back to the Finance Committee.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, whether Council President Paine was making an
amendment to the motion.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD IT AS A 10 MINUTE AGENDA ITEM AS
AGENDA ITEM 8.2.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said this has already been to the Finance Committee. If there are
questions, she suggested Councilmembers reach out to Mr. Turley to get their questions answered. She
did not want the ordinance held up; recalling she has heard repeatedly how interest rates are so low and
this needs to be done now. She agreed with Council President Paine’s amendment to get questions
answered tonight instead of going back through committee for one Councilmember.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled suggesting in an email that there be a 10 minute presentation. To
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ assertion that this had been to the Finance Committee, Councilmember
Buckshnis said it had not.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmember refrain
from calling out other Councilmembers.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the bond ordinance has never been to the Finance Committee. She was
very aware of the timing, recalling the timing was described to the Finance Committee last month. She
was interested in transparency to the citizens, reiterating the importance of this ordinance for the future of
bonding and the City’s bond rating.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW HER MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 9
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2021
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2021
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM AND PAYROLL CHECKS.
4. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM TRAVIS JOHNSON
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. COUNCIL STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE INTERVIEW
Council President Paine explained the City had advertised for a Council Student Representative and
received one application. She invited the applicant, Brook Roberts, to make a statement.
Brook Roberts thanked the Council for the past year, he enjoyed last term as a student representative and
learned a lot. For the upcoming term, he plans to focus on applying what he learned to action, garnering
youth feedback on Council issues, engaging more youth through reaching out to BSUs or LGBTQ groups
at high schools, increasing accessibly to Council matters and making them more understandable for
youth. As someone who will be moving out in a few months, one of the biggest issue facing Edmonds is
affordable housing. He was excited for Council to look at the Housing Commission’s recommendations
and will be happy to provide his input and support wherever needed. He looked forward to a great
upcoming term.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed appreciation for his highlighting engagement with youth and youth
feedback. She has firsthand experience with his passion and dedication to engaging youth on a few issues.
She welcomed his continued service on Council and was hopeful most of it would be in-person.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he enjoyed working, collaborating and chatting with Mr. Roberts about
various issues including mental health, suicide prevention and affordable housing and appreciated his
boldness in putting that on his application. Housing is a hot topic, one that only gets hotter if it is not
addressed. He looked forward to Mr. Roberts serving as student representative for the next year
representing youth in the city.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed appreciation for Mr. Roberts’ willingness to participate in
Council meetings which not always the case with other student representatives. The Council needs a
young person willing to speak up. She thanked him for applying for the position, saying he was top notch
and she could see going into m any different fields in his future.
Councilmember Olson thanked Mr. Roberts for his service last year and for reapplying. She knows what a
hard worker he is and his exploration of the many facets of government. She appreciated that and assured
it will make him extremely well rounded.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it will be great to have back Mr. Roberts back for another year
and thanked him for his service last year. A number of former student representatives keep in touch with
her, some of them were also very vocal. She recognized Mr. Roberts’ experience as student representative
last year provides a different perspective and depth of knowledge.
Councilmember K. Johnson thanked Mr. Roberts for his civic involvement, commenting he was an
example to all citizens of how to get involved and participate, which is what makes America great.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 10
Council President Paine thanked Mr. Roberts for his service and assured she will invite him to help on
projects.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO APPOINT BROOK ROBERTS AS EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL STUDENT
REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMING YEAR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. DRAFT BOND ORDINANCE
Councilmember Buckshnis requested Finance Director Dave Turley address the draft bond ordinance. Mr.
Turley recalled the bonds were discussed several times in June and July as well as at a long meeting on
August 10th where the bond was discussed and the City’s bond counsel and financial adviser were present.
At that time, the City Council approved moving forward with refinancing $10 million in bonds as well as
selling additional bonds for capital projects. Everything that discussed at that meeting has been
summarized in the ordinance. He displayed the bond schedule, highlighting the 1st Reading of Bond
Ordinance on October 5th and adoption of the ordinance on October 12th, pointing out that because
October 12th is a committee night, ordinance adoption may be moved to October 19th. The intent of
having the bond ordinance on the Consent Agenda tonight was for the Council and public to see the
ordinance and provide time for questions prior to adoption. Adoption of the bond ordinance by October
19th is important to maintain the schedule.
Mr. Turley explained the ordinance has been circulated and reviewed by several attorneys for the last 2-3
weeks as well as the Edmonds Public Facilities District/Edmonds Center for the Arts representatives.
Several small changes have been made as a result of review by about 10 parties and this is the final
ordinance. Since the City is selling the bonds, it is up to the Council to pass the ordinance.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was interested in next steps and preferred that individual
Councilmembers’ questions regarding the ordinance be asked offline.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked what constitutes first reading of the bond ordinance. City Attorney Jeff
Taraday said Edmonds does not have a reading tradition in its code like some cities do. The Council has
made it clear on numerous occasions that they like to have multiple touches; this is one of those touches
where the ordinance is included in the packet for the Council and public’s review. Mr. Turley explained
having a first reading is an old tradition; technically the Council can pass an ordinance on the first night it
is presented. Only first reading is necessary; as a courtesy staff tries to present things more than once, at
least twice, possibly three times. In the interest of being efficient and effective, he put it on the Consent
Agenda. He summarized a second reading is not legally required but is usually done as a courtesy.
Council President Paine said this was added to agenda with the knowledge that no action was required
tonight. This is first reading, and she was glad it was moving forward. The ordinance will return to
Council on either October 19th or Oct 12th if there is room on the agenda. She appreciated having an
opportunity to ask questions during the next week.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there was a differentiation between taxable and non-taxable. She
recalled Mr. Turley saying the EPFD’s bond counsel has reviewed the ordinance. She asked if that was
not an issue because it would be issued separately. Mr. Turley assured that was well defined in Section 12
of the ordinance on page 13. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Turley for putting it on the agenda
as residents have contacted her.
With regard to the possibility of a special meeting next week to keep the schedule, Councilmember Olson
said if the only reasons for not adhering to the schedule was that October 12th was committees. She
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 11
explained that could be easily remedied via the Council’s policy and plan to hold a special Council
meeting on committee night when warranted.
3. BUDGET SCHEDULING AND COORDINATION
Finance Director Dave Turley complimented Student Representative Roberts for everything he did last
year. He reviewed:
Budget books were delivered yesterday. The proposed budget is also available online at:
https://edmondswa.gov/financialreports.
Priorities asked for by Council at budget retreat:
o More structure and clarity around the schedule
Calendar with important dates
o CIP presentations earlier
First presentation October 26th, 2 weeks earlier than 2019 and 2020
o Shorter decision package presentations
If do not get enough information from presentations, ask questions early
o Less repetition on presenting large projects
Will coordinate CIP/CFP presentations with budget so less repetition
There are approximately 25 decision packages in the budget book identical to the
CIP/CFP, many of them seen in previous years or earlier this year
- To avoid repetition, will keep those at a high level
o No new amendments proposed by Councilmember on the last night of deliberations
The last two days scheduled for deliberation are November 16th and 23rd
No new proposals should be made by Councilmembers on November 23rd
Adding a new amendment on the last day is not treating colleagues fairly.
Councilmembers should not be expected to hear a proposal and vote on it the same night
as it makes it difficult to make an informed decision.
Last year’s process for introducing budget amendments was to submit them to Council
Executive Assistant Maureen Judge who collected them and sent them to Mr. Turley
Submit budget amendments prior to November 16th
Draft Calendar Highlights:
o October 4 – Mayor’s budget message, budget books available
o October 5 – Budget Scheduling and Coordination presentation/discussion
o October 19 – Decision package presentations
o October 26 – CIP Presentation
o November 1 – Budget public hearings, CIP presentation
o November 4 – Special meeting for budget deliberation
o November 9 – committee meetings
o November 16 – Public hearing, deliberations, CIP adoption
o November 23 – Deliberations and budget adoption (50 days)
o November 30 – No meeting – 5th Tuesday
Mr. Turley explained there are approximately 100 decision packages, several are more administrative in
nature; for example there is a decision package to create budget authority to make bond payments. A
decision package required for that but he did not want to spend time during Council meetings talking
about it as it is a contractual obligation that the Council has already approved. Other example of an
administrative decision package is the $1000 increase in the Neogov contract. In an effort to make it
easier, the administrative decision packages were separated out to the back of the budget book and the
decision package that may need closer review are included in the front of the budget book.
Councilmembers are welcome to ask questions about any of the decision packages; they were simply
separated to make review easier.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 12
In response to a frequently asked question, Mr. Turley explained salaries and wages already include
COLAs for 2022 and the contractually obligated increases in labor contracts. Budget books were
available last night. There will be a presentation on decision packages on October 19th and the first
meeting scheduled for deliberation is November 4th. He has often heard that the most important thing the
Council does all year is passing the budget ordinance. Mayor and staff have spent several months putting
the proposed budget together and it is an honor to have such a big part in preparing this important
document for all the citizens of Edmonds. It would be disappointing to do all that hard work and deliver it
to the Council and have it shelved for a month. As the most important thing the Council does, he hoped
Councilmembers would give it the high priority it deserves and spend time now thoroughly reviewing it
and preparing proposed changes. Having been married for 21 years, he knew that birthday gifts he gave
thought to for several weeks were better received than those purchased the afternoon of his wife’s
birthday. Preparation and doing research early is always best. He will be available starting tonight and
tomorrow morning to field any and all questions. He wanted to do everything he could to make this
budget season as successful and stress free as possible.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled as Council President the last two years it was very frustrating
when Councilmember did not submit their amendments in a timely fashion because it throws off staff,
Councilmembers and citizens. She asked if there was a drop-dead date on the calendar for
Councilmembers to submit amendments. Mr. Turley answered this is a draft calendar; some of the
meetings may get moved. He recalled that was something the Council agreed on at the budget retreat,
getting the budget calendar out early and submitting amendments before the second to last meeting is the
only way it will work as that will provide time to present and talk amendments at the second to last
meeting instead of the last meeting.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what would happen when inevitably Councilmembers submit
amendments late. She recalled asking Councilmembers repeatedly last year and amendments were still
submitted late. She asked if this was a request or should there be a motion saying if amendments were
submitted after a certain date, they would not be considered. Mr. Turley said this is the Council’s process,
he can do his best to shepherd them along and keep things on schedule, but it is up to Councilmembers to
agree to stick to the rules.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the Council could put something in writing stating after a
certain date, amendments to the budget would no longer be accepted. There is nothing in the code that
states that, only that the budget will be adopted by a certain date. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said the
Council basically makes its own rules. The good part about that is the Council make its own rules; the bad
part is the Council can change its rules at any time so nothing is really set in stone. The Council might
theoretically bind itself to a drop-dead date, but that was only good as long as there is a majority that
believes that drop-dead date should be maintained when that date comes.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if it would be reasonable to do a motion identifying the drop-dead
date for submissions. Mr. Taraday answered that is for the Council to decide whether it is reasonable.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the last two years were very difficult due to Councilmembers
not submitting amendments in a timely fashion. Mr. Taraday said that question was better answered by
her fellow Councilmembers. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented those would probably be the
same Councilmembers that provide things at the last minute.
Councilmember Distelhorst said he had not picked up his budget book yet but had downloaded all the
documents. He asked if the decision packages were out of numbered order, administrative versus the rest,
in the physical book. Mr. Turley said the three pages of decision packages online do not include the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 13
administrative decision packages. Councilmember Distelhorst relayed his understanding that the 106 page
decision packages do not include administrative decision package. Mr. Turley agreed.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if there was precedent set by possibly adopting the administrative
decision packages in bulk versus one-by-one. Mr. Taraday said this would be his 11th year watching the
Council adopt the budget and it had not been done the same way every year as different Finance Directors
and Councils have had slightly different approaches. What matters most is what works best for the
Council this year. Councilmember Distelhorst suggested the Council consider adopting the administrative
decision packages together versus one-by-one.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled at the retreat some Councilmembers did not want presentations, but
she knew a lot of people including herself enjoy the presentations. She opined this was a very aggressive
schedule; she recalled one year when Mayor Nelson was Council President and at the 11th hour when
then-Mayor Earling was going to veto the budget, the Council held a special meeting in mid-December.
She recalled budget discussions typically go into December so this seemed like a very aggressive
schedule.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she is always prepared for budget discussions and a lot of people come to
her to get answers. She recalled a complaint last year that the budget book was online but decision
packages were not. She just learned late this afternoon that a budget message was done and that the
budget books were available. She asked if the budget book and all 110 decision packages were available.
Mr. Turley answered yes, except for the administrative decision packages. Councilmember Buckshnis
recalled the administrative decision package had been adopted in bulk or in groups of 5-10.
Councilmember Buckshnis did not want to have time constraints or a deadline for adopting the budget
because there are numerous items on upcoming agendas in addition to the budget. She asked whether
Q&A regarding the budget would be posted on the website. Mr. Turley said it was up to Council, but he
was planning to have emails sent to him or to departments (and copied to him) so questions can be
grouped together and like last year, questions and answers posted once a week. He recalled last year Q&A
were posted on November 12th, 19th and 24th.
Councilmember Buckshnis cited the importance of everyone taking their own time to understand the
budget. She did not want to establish a drop-dead date of November 23rd, commenting that would be a
gold star for Council as they have never approved a budget in November. She wanted to ensure the
Council did not rush through the budget because citizens like to see what is happening in the departments
and the presentations. The budget is very important to citizens; during Councilmember Olson’s town halls
citizens had a lot of very interesting and good ideas.
Councilmember K. Johnson agreed the budget was the most important thing the Council does and she
takes it very seriously. She always peruses the budget once, studies it, makes notes in her budget book
and then sends in questions. She agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis that there had never been such
an aggressive schedule, the Council had never adopted the budget in November, and usually adopted it in
December. There is a drop-dead date of December 31st in the RCW. She understood staff had been
working on the budget for months and the Mayor has presented the budget, but from this point on, it is the
Council’s budget and the Council is responsible for setting the budget.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to the budget calendar that includes a budget deliberation on a
Thursday. Mr. Turley agreed there was budget deliberation scheduled on Thursday, November 4th. When
the calendar was developed, optimal dates were discussed and November 4th was identified for a special
meeting on the budget. He recalled that was discussed at the retreat, carving out time for a meeting
regarding the budget without other distractions. Councilmember K. Johnson preferred to have a meeting
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 14
regarding the budget on a Tuesday versus a Thursday. She agreed with having a separate meeting for
budget deliberation but if the schedule is extended into December, that will not be an issue.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the CIP presentations would include the CFP. Mr. Turley answered
yes. Councilmember K. Johnson suggested it would be helpful on the schedule to indicate public hearings
for either the budget or the CIP/CFP. Mr. Turley said the November calendar has public hearings on
November 1st and November 16th. Councilmember K. Johnson asked about the public hearing on the
CIP/CFP. Mr. Turley said the presentations are on November 1st and he believed that was also the public
hearing. Councilmember K. Johnson commented the CIP presentations are on October 26th and November
1st with a public hearing on the same day as the presentation but she will let Mr. Turley and Council
President Paine work that out. She requested the public hearing be added to the calendar. Mr. Turley
agreed.
Mr. Turley commented since it had been brought up 2-3 times, before he worked at Edmonds, he worked
at King County which included participating in budget preparation. King County routinely passes their
budget before Thanksgiving. The only way that is accomplished is having structure around the schedule
and sticking to the calendar. It is a much less painful process at King County.
Councilmember L. Johnson remembered last year as a new Councilmember going through her first
budget season, she took it very seriously; her budget book was marked up and beginning day one she
carefully determined where she wanted to make proposals and submitted them formally and early. She
found the process frustrating because not everyone took that same approach. She is hearing from
Councilmembers tonight that the Council has always done it this way and she took issue with that because
it was seasoned Councilmembers last year that were submitting budget proposals late from the dais which
did not give Councilmember an opportunity to review them in advance or give them the thought they
deserved. She found it concerning that the Council was setting itself up for that same process.
Councilmember L. Johnson suggested calling it a drop-dead date may add to that; instead, it could be a
firm date that is the ideal goal to get it done before the last meeting in November. She was feeling last
year’s frustrations when staff has proposed a great schedule and Councilmembers are already wanting to
extend it into December. She found it very frustrating last year that not everyone took the time to put their
proposals together and send them out so Councilmembers could do their due diligence and seriously
consider them. Instead several were proposed at the last minute at a 4+ hour meeting when, although she
is a night owl, her brain was not able to process them. She implored Councilmembers to attempt to do
their best to stick to the schedule and she will do the same.
Council President Paine said she and Mr. Turley have been in close consult about the preferences
expressed at the budget retreat including more efficient meetings. She agreed there were comments made
regarding “death by PowerPoint.” As Councilmember L. Johnson mentioned, she too was frustrated last
year, she would like to have presentations sent to Councilmembers, and having Q&A available online.
She found the proposed schedule very doable. She reminded there is a lot of information on the extended
agenda that shows agenda items through December. She was hopeful the last meeting for 2021 would be
December 14th which is a committee night. She noted the first meeting in December is December 7th,
followed by committee meetings on December 14th; the month of December does not have a lot of
meeting dates and there is a 5th Tuesday in November. She encouraged Councilmembers to do their due
diligence, get information out to all Councilmembers early to allow time for research. She recalled the
City of Seattle shut down from Labor Day to Thanksgiving and no one could submit ordinances because
it was budget season. She summarized it would be nice to have the budget adopted by Thanksgiving.
Councilmember Olson recalled it was unanimous at the retreat about being more scheduled and get things
done earlier than has happened in the past. She suggested highlighting the Thursday budget deliberation
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 15
to ensure everyone has it on their calendar as it is not a regular Council meeting. The budget is a big job
and sometimes takes longer than expected and even if the special meeting is held on November 4th, a
deadline may slip simply because it takes longer and room needs to be left for that possibility. She liked
the schedule as it reflects the consensus at the budget retreat.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested instead of meeting on Thursday, November 4th, using the 5th
Tuesday on November 30th as a fallback. She offered to make that as a motion as she did not think she
was available on November 4th due to other plans on that day.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the Council does not seem to be taking into consideration that many
citizens are very interested in the budget and that takes time. There are items on upcoming agendas that
will take time and citizens will comment. It’s not wrong to have budget discussions extend into December
were wrong. It is very helpful for citizens to see what has been done in the past, but apparently the
Council is interested in a higher level approach. Citizens are interested in the budget and CIP/CFP as a
result of Councilmember Olson’s town halls. The Council needs to take time with those documents due to
citizens’ concerns about streets and public safety. She summarized Councilmembers need to consider that
citizens may need more time versus completing the budget process by Thanksgiving.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said citizens have seven opportunities to speak to Council at upcoming
meetings. She did not consider meetings in the various different arenas as transparent or open. When
Council meetings are on Zoom, people can watch the recording but you cannot hear what happened in a
park. She hoped all those people who wanted to provide input would come forward. With regard to
Councilmember K. Johnson’s suggestion to meet on the 5th Tuesday, she said some people may have
plans that day and meeting on a 5th Tuesday is not necessarily beneficial for those who may need time
away since the only time the Council has off is Christmas.
Councilmember L. Johnson referred to comments that there is an attempt to do this very quick. She asked
whether the City Clerk or Mr. Turley, who may have knowledge of other cities, whether this was a
condensed schedule and was it an attempt to do it quick or was it a common schedule that was starting on
time with a well laid out plan. She offered to also research other cities’ processes. To the idea that this is
very quick, she said it did not seem quick, but rather a well thought out plan that leaves buffer room at the
end. Mr. Turley said he could also research it; his only direct experience was King County whose budget
was routinely passed before Thanksgiving. He has been told offline that some people do not plan to look
at their budget books until November. If so, they are only giving themselves four weeks. Starting in
October provides 7-8 weeks which is plenty of time. Citizens can start contacting Councilmembers or him
this week.
Councilmember K. Johnson relayed she heard anecdotally that Mountlake Terrace finished their budget
the last day of December and the lights went out and they brought in candles and worked into the wee
hours. She assured the Council would not do that.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
4. AMENDMENT TO CITY'S AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH COUNTY FIRE
City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the City operated its own fire department prior to 2010. In 2010, the
City began contracting for fire services with Fire District 1 (FD1) The level of service (LOS) stayed the
same under the original interlocal agreement (ILA) with FD1 and that LOS was three firefighters at each
of the City’s three fire stations plus a dedicated 2-person paramedic unit for a total of 11 firefighters on
duty in the City 24/7. In 2017 the City and FD1 amended the ILA and reduced the total number on duty
from 11 to 9 and changed staffing from a dedicated 2-person paramedic unit to one paramedic in each of
the three fire stations, reducing the overall total staffing from 11 to 9.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 16
Mr. Taraday explained the 2017 amendments also added new formulas to the ILA primarily intended to
measure the amount of time that units from one jurisdiction, for example Lynnwood, responded into
another jurisdiction such as Edmonds or vice versa. One of reasons these formulas were included in the
2017 ILA was because as the City was proposing to go from 11 to 9 on duty, the FD1 negotiating team
expressed concern that Edmonds was creating circumstances where surrounding jurisdictions would be
subsidizing Edmonds’ fire service. A formula was agreed upon that is referred to in the ILA as
Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor (NUUF). The NUUF metric was considered to be in balance if one
jurisdiction’s total time on task in the neighboring jurisdiction was within 10% of the neighboring
jurisdiction’s time on task in the first jurisdiction.
Mr. Taraday displayed a map of the South Sno Co Fire and Rescue Regional Fire Authority boundaries
and South Sno Fire and Rescue service area contract cities. He explained South County Fire (SCF)
succeeded FD1 when FD1 and Lynnwood created an RFA and even though the last round of negotiations
were with FD1, SCF is the party the City contracts with by virtue of their being the successor in interest.
To explain NUUF, Mr. Taraday provided the example of Lynnwood units responding into Edmonds 115
hours/year and Edmonds units responding into Lynnwood 100 hours/year; under the terms of the ILA,
that would not be considered in balance as it has to be within 10% to be in balance. If the total time that
Lynnwood units spend in Edmonds was 105 hours/year and the total time Edmonds units spent in
Lynnwood was 100 hours/year, that would be in balance. The agreement measures time in seconds, but he
was using hours to make it easier to understand how NUUF is calculated. At the time this was calculated,
Lynnwood was its own separate fire department and FD1 was its own separate fire district; now those are
combined into South County Fire. NUUF can be calculated a number of ways; the bottom line is no
matter how it is calculated, the data shows that neighboring cities are respond into Edmonds significantly
more than Edmonds units are responding into neighboring cities like Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace.
Mr. Taraday clarified when he talks about Lynnwood or Edmonds units, they are all SCF fire units, but
for the purpose of 2017negotiations, the parties felt it was important at that time to keep track of where
units were coming from. For example, a Lynnwood unit is a SCF unit that is stationed in the City of
Lynnwood or a Mountlake Terrace unit is a SCF unit stationed in Mountlake Terrace.
Mr. Taraday referred to a letter the City received recently from SCF that indicates the NUUF from
Mountlake Terrace into Edmonds is 157% and 252% from Lynnwood into Edmonds. Those numbers
would have to be at 110% to be considered in balance under the terms of the contract and they are fairly
significantly beyond 110%. Due to that, according to the agreement, the NUUF is out of balance. That
matters because the agreement with SCF brings the parties back to the table whenever the NUUF is out of
balance. It does not happen automatically, but if SCF sends the City notice that the NUUF is out of
balance, which it did in June 2021, that notice is called a threshold notice and triggers a 120-day period
during which the parties have to figure out what to do about the NUUF being out of balance. It does not
dictate that any one particular thing happens as a result, but it is a trigger that brings the parties back to
the bargaining table.
Mr. Taraday explained now that the City has received the threshold notice, the City has to designate what
are called in agreement remedial measures, what the City proposes to do to bring the NUUF back into
balance. SCF also gets to make its suggestions which they have done. The City has a deadline by which to
designate remedial measures to bring the NUUF back into balance. SCF and its board were kind enough
to extend the deadline by 30 days so the City has until November 1, 2021 to designate those remedial
measures. Tonight’s discussion is to begin that process. This will not be the Council’s last touch, but it is
a significant enough issue that the Council needs to begin thinking about it as soon as possible. Mr.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 17
Taraday explained he has talked with each Councilmember individually to bring them up to speed, but it
is important that the public also understand what is going on.
With regard to the remedial measures proposed by SCF, Mr. Taraday explained SCF sent a letter in June
(in the packet) that proposed remedial measures as follows: one additional 24-hour 2-person unit and one
additional 12-hour 2-person unit which is estimated to cost $2.25 million/year in addition to the current
bill for fire/EMS services. In response to that proposal from SCF, Mayor Nelson developed his own
proposal that he wants to get Council feedback on. His proposal is still in formation in the sense that both
of his alternatives cost approximately the same, $1.5 million/year in addition to existing costs versus
SCF’s proposal that costs $2.25 million, or $750,000 less per year. The Mayor is seeking Council
feedback on whether to spend that on one 24-hour 2-person unit which would essentially bring the City
back to 2016 staffing and for many years before that. When the City had its own fire department, it also
had had 11 firefighters 24/7. The Mayor’s proposed Option 1 would be one 24-hour 2-person unit and
Option 2 is two 12-hour 2-person units or peak hour units. Both options cost roughly the same, but each
have pluses and minus. The 24-hour unit would provide 24 hours of coverage so if something happened at
night, there would be additional preparedness for nighttime emergencies. Approximately 70% of the
City’s call volume happens during the 12 peak hours so if the desire was additional preparedness during
the peak, two 12-hour units would be the way to go. Reasonable minds can differ on which way is the
best which is why the Mayor is seeking the Council’s feedback. SCF will speak to this later, because they
have a fairly strong preference for the 24-hour unit.
Mr. Taraday explained the NUUF calculation is the reason for this presentation. There was an assumption
at the time that NUUF would do a fair job of measuring whether a city was paying its fair share. To an
extent it does that, but it is not as simple as that. He clarified he is not nearly the fire expect that the SCF
representatives are, but he has come to understand this reasonably well over the years, but he is a lawyer,
not a firefighter. He explained SCF uses automatic vehicle locator (AVL), computer aided dispatch,
which uses AVL to calculate which unit is closest to the call and sends the closest unit to the call. For
example, if the computer sees that a Lynnwood unit is 10 seconds closer to an Edmonds call than an
Edmonds unit, it will send the Lynnwood unit to the call because it is 10 seconds closer. The computer
does not pay attention to jurisdictional boundaries and does not look at whether it is Lynnwood or
Edmonds unit; it sees all the units and all the calls and sends the closest unit to the call.
Mr. Taraday explained the NUUF is not just a measure of a jurisdiction’s relative resources devoted to
EMS, but also a factor of which units are closest to the call. If a unit is closer, it will be dispatched and
that dispatch time will count into the NUUF calculation even if an Edmonds unit happened to be available
at the time. In his opinion, the fact that Swedish Hospital is located in Edmonds skews the NUUF
calculation because when units drop off patients at the hospital, they go back into service while still in
Edmonds, the computer sees them as available and if a call comes in and they are closest, the computer
will dispatch them to that call. The effect on the NUUF calculation of the hospital’s location has never
been quantified, but he believed it played a role. The hospital is also not only an end destination for calls
for service, but the area around the hospital is also a significant generator of calls for service so it stands
to reason that neighboring units near the hospital area would be dispatched.
Mr. Taraday displayed the 2018 heat map, which he noted did not change much year-to-year, and demand
is fairly consistent based on land use. The red circle on the map demonstrates the effect of the hospital on
call volume, a factor that also needs to be taken into account.
Mr. Taraday commented the one thing that cannot be disputed is the more resources a jurisdiction
dedicates to fire and EMS service, the more prepared that jurisdiction will be to face emergency
situations. In his opinion and he believed SCF agreed, there is no level of resource that would allow a city
to be prepared for every single emergency; no matter how much is spent on fire and EMS service, there
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 18
will always be some emergency a jurisdiction is not prepared for. Certainly more resources equals more
preparation, but jurisdictions can never be perfectly prepared for everything. The Council has to decide
what the right level of preparedness and resources is and how to allocate those resources, whether it’s two
12-hour units, one 24-hour unit or something else.
Thad Hovis, Fire Chief, SCF, thanked the Council for having this important item on its agenda and for
inviting him, Deputy Chief Bob Eastman and Assistant Fire Marshal Karl Fitterer to attend tonight’s
meeting. He is very proud that the dedicated employees of the RFA continue to provide outstanding fire
and emergency medical services to Edmonds and the balance of the entire 50 square mile service area
covering about 275,000 residents in southwest Snohomish County. This is the agency’s 21st month
responding to the pandemic; to date they have provided EMS transport of 753 confirmed COVID-19
positive patients. He thanked the Council, Mayor, Staff and Edmonds residents for their partnership as
they all continue to navigate these very challenging times.
Chief Hovis explained the RFA reported in February and again in March 2021 that the NUUF and
Transport Balance Factor (TBF) are both out of balance as described in the 2017 renegotiated agreement
between originally FD1 and now the RFA and the City of Edmonds. As Mr. Taraday explained, the RFA
issued a threshold notification to the City and has proposed remedial measures to address necessary
balancing of the NUUF and TBF. Since those notifications, he, Deputy Chief Eastman, the RFA’s
attorney Rich Davis have had discussion on the RFA’s proposed remedial measures with Mayor Nelson
and Mr. Taraday. He was aware the Council and Mayor have many competing interests to consider as
they develop and later approve the 2022 City budget. On behalf of the RFA and the elected board of fire
commissioners, he respectfully requested the Council approve the RFA’s proposed remedial measures to
bring both the NUUF and the TBF into balance. The proposed remedial measures are one 24-hour EMS
unit and one 12-hour EMS transport unit.
Chief Hovis referred to the heat map that Mr. Taraday displayed and Grid 157, the hot spot where
Swedish Hospital is located and the apex of three cities – Lynnwood across the street, Mountlake Terrace
to the south and the hospital is located within Edmonds. That has been the hot spot of Snohomish County
and Southwest Snohomish County since well before Edmonds begin contracting with FD1.
Chief Hovis explained he was raised in the Five Corners area of Edmonds, attended Chase Lake
Elementary, College Place Middle and graduated from Edmonds High School. He was a volunteer
Firefighter/EMT with Edmonds Fire Department before becoming a professional firefighters in 1996 at
Mountlake Terrace Fire Department. Because of his roots in the City and his local history in the fire
service, he knows the area and the Edmonds Fire Department and wanted to provide additional context to
the remedial measures. As Mr. Taraday described there were nine firefighters on staff per day, three at
each fire station plus a two person medic unit as well as a battalion chief when the City contracted with
FD1. The year he graduated from Edmonds High School was when the Edmonds Fire Department went to
three person staffing each day at the City’s fire stations. There was a big fire in the 800 block of Walnut
Street that couldn’t be control with available Edmonds firefighters and because of automatic/mutual aid
from Lynnwood, FD1 and Mountlake Terrace, that fire went on for a while. There is no fire department in
the Town of Woodway and no available fire service response from the Puget Sound. A lot of
characteristics make Edmonds great but its topography and location on the map make it more difficult to
provide fire service especially with the changes in the 2017 ILA.
Councilmember Distelhorst recalled an idea discussed in the meeting and listed in the agenda memo was
an option of staggered 2-person units, one that is 8 to 8 and another 12 to 12 or whatever the scheduling
needs to be to address both the peak as well as provide additional coverage. He recognized SCF had a
preferred option, but asked if that would provide more coverage on the ends as well as maximizing
resources. Mr. Taraday said from his perspective as a lawyer it made a lot of intuitive sense to expand the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 19
peak hour coverage to 14 hours or 16 hours by staggering two peak hour units so he understood the logic,
but he could not speak to whether that would get to 70% or 80% of calls. He also could not speak to other
possible ramifications of that concept.
Chief Hovis responded SCF has a current collective bargaining agreement with the local that has the
ability to deploy three peak activity units across the entire RFA. If additional peak activity units were
added, it would require bargaining with the local. The hours of work are from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. which has
been identified as the peak activity times throughout the RFA. There is no ability to go 14 or 16 hours, it
is either a 12 hour shift or 24 hours.
Mr. Taraday clarified Councilmember Distelhorst’s question was not expanding the length of the shift,
but whether one 12-hour unit could start at 6 a.m. and another 12-hour unit start at 10 a.m. so there is
some peak hour coverage 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. but they would still be 12 hour shift. Councilmember
Distelhorst agreed that was his question, a 12-hour shift that was 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and another 12-hour
shift that was noon to midnight, not changing the shift length but changing the shift timing to provide
more overlap of two 2-person units during the peak. Chief Hovis said that has been discussed with the
local but the current limitation is 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Changing that would require conversations with the
local to bargain that.
Council President Paine asked who would have the discretion for locating whichever units the City
decides to add, whether it was a 24-hour unit, two 12-hour units or a mixture. Mr. Taraday said his sense
was that issue had not been completely addressed in discussions. As the City’s advocate, his position
would be if the point was to address the NUUF calculation, the additional resources should be placed at
stations where they were more likely to address the NUUF calculation. If the ILA no longer includes the
NUUF, and goes back to the way the agreement read in 2016, he might be content to say they can be
anywhere in Edmonds at the Fire Chief’s discretion. There are several possibilities and it will depend on
other ways the agreement is negotiated. Chief Hovis responded it is the RFA’s and his desire as Fire
Chief to be able to deploy the resources in the City based on the demands or data. He did not currently
have the ability to do that; based on the current ILA, there are three firefighters at each location.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled she and Councilmember L. Johnson have asked for peak
coverage data and asked if that had been provided. Mr. Taraday said the materials in the packet were
everything he has now. As this moves forward, he will try to get additional information. He asked if she
was interested in the percentage of calls during the peak time. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas answered
yes, commenting the City was being asked to pay another $1.5 million for fire service based on calls into
the City and she wanted to have the peak coverage time when the highest number of calls occur. She
understood there were issues with labor, shifts, and collective bargaining but she wanted to add staff at
the time when peak calls are occurring.
Chief Hovis said they are working on that data and will provide it to the City soon. One of the things
about the Edmonds fire stations is they are all cross staffed, meaning they either staff an engine or a
medic unit based on dispatch. One of the thoughts is to be able to have fire protection in Edmonds when
stations are on EMS calls. Part of the 24-hour proposal is to be able to have one dedicated fire
extinguishment resource available in Edmonds when there might be a medical call, BLS response in
Edmonds, to be able to address the daytime with two units and the nighttime with one unit. Currently
when peak activity units log off, that extra protection is lost at night. Edmonds is a great place to work,
live and play, but a lot of people are not home during the daytime so they are trying to look at the 24-hour
all hazards approach with their proposal.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding that most of calls are paramedic driven and
not fire protection. Chief Hovis agreed most of the calls are EMS driven, Edmonds’ EMS rate is about
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 20
88% compared to 80% in the RFA overall. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said that is the obligation to
the citizens, if there is an increase, it should protect those that need EMS assistance more than fire
assistance which is why she is trying to get the peak coverage nailed down. Her understanding was the
increased calls for EMS were during the daytime, not nighttime. Chief Hovis said there are more calls of
all types during the day than at night. EMS are about the same proportion at night versus during the day,
but there more of them during the day. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said especially if more resources
are allocated, they should be targeted towards areas that would have the most benefit for citizens.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked for clarification, was the fire in 1989 when he graduated from high
school the reason the City made the choice to go to 11 full-time firefighters. Chief Hovis answered the
City of Edmonds only had two fire stations at that time, Station 16 at Five Corners, the station known as
Station 6, and the downtown Station 7. Now the City has three stations. At that time, the decision was
made to hire more people to have enough professional staff to balance all the stations with nine people
counting the one up the hill where FD1 already had three people. In 1988/1989 the City hired a group and
put 3 people at both stations 24-hours/day, the first year that Edmonds had full-time staffing of 3 people.
That was 32 years ago, the 3 people at each station or 9 people staffing the City is the same as it was back
in 1989.
Councilmember L. Johnson said it was surprising when Chief Hovis was in high school and around the
same time she was in high school that the staffing level was the same as her three kids who are in high
school are offered now, but the population has increased. It is not surprising the City is in this position;
she was one of the citizens who strongly opposed the reduction in 2017. In fact her then 10-year old son
testified that as someone with life-threatening allergies, response time was critical to him. She supported
getting back to where staffing levels were to ensure the high level response times continue to be provided.
SCF has a proposal and the Mayor has two proposals. The packet states there is no scientifically correct
answer, however, along with the data from SCF that the NUUF is out of balance, there should be data that
identifies when the calls are happening to assist in making a decision. Similar to Mr. Taraday saying
intuitively it seems like the two 2-person peak activity unit would be the first choice, she tended to agree,
but she had nothing to base it on and needed science to support her decision. She encouraged SCF to do
their best to provide that information to assist the City in making a decision that was not just based on
intuition. Chief Hovis said Mr. Taraday has one additional request and SCF will talking with him and
Mayor Nelson in the near future.
Councilmember Olson thanked SCF for their grace and providing flexibility on the timing. She
acknowledged there is a significant difference between what SCF is asking for and Mayor Nelson’s
proposal. She appreciated the work Mayor Nelson did and for developing a counterproposal. Looking at
this strictly from a contracting officer standpoint, it seems obvious that two 12-hour shifts would get the
City into contract compliance much more likely than one 24-hour shift. Since that is the City’s obligation
in the contract and if something needs to be tried with a wait and see approach, she could not imagine the
City doing a one 24-hour shift versus the two 12-hour shifts unless the City received some grace on the
NUUF in exchange.
Chief Hovis referred to Mr. Taraday’s explanation of the ILA in the packet and discussions between the
RFA and the City about the City’s proposed counter measures. SCF took the approach of proposing
something they thought would solve both the NUUF and TBF in a very positive way. It is difficult to
answer that question without understanding how the three options compare. The options are two during
the day, one during the day, or their proposal for one 24-hour that also covers the 12 hours and one during
the day that provides two units during the daytime. He asked if that answered Councilmember Olson’s
question.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 21
Councilmember Olson said it answered her question, but it is always about choices regarding how much
money the City has and how to spend it. No matter what, the City would be spending a lot in addition to
what it has been spending and it is hard to look at the Cadillac package that SCF proposed without
considering the possibility that the Mayor’s proposal would meet the needs and the contract terms that
have to be met. Chief Hovis agreed. With regard to addressing the NUUF, he will leave that to Mayor
Nelson and the Council’s deliberations with Mr. Taraday.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she also grew up near Five Corners, attended Westgate Elementary,
Edmonds Junior High and also graduated from Edmonds High. She remembered the fire station at Five
Corners and the noontime whistle. She also remembered Medic 7 at Stevens Hospital. As all the
discussions point to Swedish Edmonds as the epicenter, she suggested having a base at Swedish to service
those needs. Public safety is a priority and Edmonds has an aging population and needs to take care of the
community. She was concerned with the turnout times in the contract that have never been met and
remedial efforts that have not been successful. Chief Hovis said SCF has had initial discussions with
stakeholders at Swedish Edmonds about potentially using that or nearby buildings for future infill fire
stations or locations to respond from. When Medic 7 dissolved in the mid-2000s, the City of Edmonds
took one unit, the Medic 17 unit that went away with the 2017 ILA change, and the City of Lynnwood
took the other. They are still serving the community but in a different way. With regard to performance
measures, Chief Hovis relayed his understanding from then-Fire Chief Tomberg that the City-adopted
performance measures from 2006 had never been met in the City. Those are considered as part of the
annual report which will be presented in February/March 2022.
Council President Paine added her request for aggregated data regarding times, uses and the area around
the hospital. She noted there is an aid car on the waterfront on the other side of the tracks to ensure there
is some EMS service. She was interested in reviewing the data to ensure services are right sized.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Chief Hovis for answering her questions during the week regarding
the number of aid cars required for a choking incident or a med-X response. She recalled then-
Councilmembers Teitzel, Mesaros and she questioning the NUUF because Swedish was a hot spot and it
did not consider five seconds on Edmonds or five seconds in Lynnwood. An Edmonds resident could be
having a choking incident and Edmonds apparatus should be responding. When a recent incident
happened and all seven showed up including the closest units.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled when the ILA was approved in 2017, it included Exhibit E that
addressed NUUF and TBF and other factors when moving from 11 to 9. If the City returns to 11 or
another number based on negotiations, she asked if Exhibit E would go away. Chief Hovis said he, Chief
Eastman and Assistant Fire Marshal Fitterer were not part of those negotiations so they did not know the
context or why it was added other than it measured the impacts of the Fitch study. Mr. Taraday said he
would recommend it go away in the next version of the ILA. There is a much better understanding now of
how sensitive that calculation is to very small differences in time. For example, in late 2017, then-Chief
Brad Reading made minor adjustments to the CAD protocols to add 15 seconds of artificial delay so the
computer would think that the Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace stations were 15 seconds further away
than they actually were and that 15 seconds significantly reduced the NUUF. That tells him it is not really
as good a measure of equitable resource allocation as it was perhaps intended to be and that there are a lot
of other major factors that affect it such as AVL and the location of the hospital.
Councilmember Buckshnis said in her opinion it would be reinstating what the City had before and that
ILA did not have any of these calculations. She recalled those numbers did not make sense because
Swedish Edmonds is the hot spot. She supported eliminating Exhibit E as it was no longer necessary. She
expressed support for Mayor Nelson’s Option 2. She also supported relooking at the turnout rates from
2010, recalling that former Chief Widdis also suggested looking at the turnout times. For the public,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 22
Councilmember Buckshnis explained it takes 11 people on scene for a Med-X incident. Chief Hovis said
as someone who had a Med X incident at his father’s house, there were 11+ responders from Edmonds
fire stations and other areas who were able to get him back and get him to Swedish Edmonds and at least
get family together to make really hard decisions. High performance CPR saves lives, 50% or higher save
rate is what SCF aims for.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she moved to Edmonds from Richmond Beach in 1983 and
remembered the arson fire on 5th Avenue, a huge fire that burned a building under construction, but it was
arson which is not predictable. She did not recall how many alarms that fire was. Chief Hovis said the fire
he was referring to was in the 800 block of Walnut in 1989. The 5th Avenue fire that Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas referred to was a 4+ alarm response. A large fire like the SHAG Center under
development in Lynnwood was 4-5 alarms with over 130 firefighters from all over the county.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested when the Council returns to in-person meetings inviting SCF to
train the Council before a meeting in the new CPR and how to save lives. Chief Hovis said the ACT
(Antidote, Compression and Tourniquet) training is offered virtually now and offered to send the Mayor
and Council information. He commented it was nice to see Councilmember K. Johnson at Sno-911
meetings. Councilmember K. Johnson commented she has enjoyed the meetings including one today
about future facilities.
Mr. Taraday said this will come back to Council in the future, obviously before the November 1st deadline
to respond to SCF. Council President Paine advised a public hearing is scheduled on October 26th and a
final decision on November 1st.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked all the participants at Halloween Howl where there were 25-30 dogs
in costumes. She also thanked Community Engagement Officer Tabatha Shoemake and Senior Animal
Control Officer Jessi Gilginas for attending.
Councilmember Olson announced the Heroes Café, an ongoing veterans social event, is coming to
Edmonds on the first Wednesday of each month. The launch is tomorrow, October 6th at the Edmonds
Food Bank Service Center at the Methodist Church on Caspers. It starts at 10 a.m. and lunch is served
from 11 to 11:15 a.m. She invited veterans and anyone who knows a veteran to join them.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it was clear from comments today that it is election season
in season in Edmonds and “everybody hold onto your chairs.”
Councilmember K. Johnson announced October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Domestic
Violence Services of Snohomish County has partnered with the City of Edmonds to bring awareness to
domestic violence issues and providing services to the community. In the last year, shelter requests have
increased 24%, housing requests have increased 46%, and there has been a 33% increase in their support
line, clearly COVID has had a significant impact. She was wearing purple tonight because they have
asked everyone to wear purple on Tuesdays in October to provide support to their program. Domestic
Violence Services can be accessed by calling 425-25-ABUSE (425-252-2873), or online at www.DVS-
SNOCO.org.
Councilmember K. Johnson reiterated her request for the administration to look into ways to include
video for public comment. She anticipated virtual meetings would continue for another month and she
would like to like to see the faces of people talking to the Council, not just the audio.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 23
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the City for proclaiming September as National Suicide Prevention
Month and thanked Councilmember Distelhorst for bringing awareness to Edmonds last year. The City
held two virtual events on the past two Thursdays, a community panel on suicide prevention and mental
health awareness, and a QPR (Question, Persuade, Refer) presentation and training by Wendy Burchill,
Snohomish Health District. Councilmember L. Johnson noted she learned things from both events which
are posted online at www.Wecare.Edmondswa.gov.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Councilmember K. Johnson for highlighting Domestic Violence
Awareness Month and Councilmember L. Johnson for highlighting National Suicide Prevention Month in
September. This month is also National Bullying Prevention Month and Disability Employment
Awareness Month. He referred to an initiative he circulated to Councilmembers, the Mayor and City staff,
A Week Without Driving hosted by the Disability Mobility Initiative under Disability Rights Washington.
He is signed up for October 22 – 29 and offered to help anyone else consider what it means to live
without the ability to drive and how that is done in this community and county. Further information is
available at www.DisabilityRightswa.org/nodriving.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND TO 10:30.
Councilmember Distelhorst suggested 10:20 p.m. which Councilmember Olson accepted as a friendly
amendment.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Council President Paine expressed her appreciation for City staff’s assistance with the Youth Commission
interviews last night. There were six remarkable students applicants and four vacancies on the Youth
Commission. She was hopeful that volunteer opportunities could be identified for two of the candidates.
She also appreciated the opportunity to participate in a small way in the suicide prevention discussion last
Thursday. She found it very informative and recommended everyone watch it so they were prepared for
QPR conversations before they needed it.
Council President Paine invited the community to contribute to the Bill Anderson Memorial Viewing
Scope fundraising to purchase a wildlife viewing scope that will be installed at the marsh platform where
Mr. Anderson and his son Daren took pictures of birds. The goal is to raise $5,000 and the Port has
offered to provide a contributing match over a certain threshold. She encouraged the community to
remember Mr. Anderson in this meaningful way. Further information and donations can be made by
calling the City’s Parks Department at 425-771-0230. The City also accepts checks but does not have the
ability to accept online contributions.
Student Representative Roberts thanked the Council for reappointing him, commenting he was stoked to
serve another year. He thanked Councilmembers L. Johnson and Distelhorst for their support of the
National Suicide Prevention Month initiative which means a lot to many in the community. He also
thanked Councilmember K. Johnson for highlighting Domestic Violence Awareness Month. He urged the
public to wear masks, make safe choices and have a peaceful evening.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson thanked Councilmembers for raising awareness of domestic violence and suicide
prevention. He reported eight people died from COVID in Snohomish County this past week. To date
since February 2021 94% of people contracting COVID are not vaccinated, 94% of those hospitalized
with COVID are not vaccinated and 93% of hospitalized persons who die from COVID are not
vaccinated. He urged the public to please get vaccinated because the COVID-19 vaccine saves lives.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 24
11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO RECEIVE AND EVALUATE COMPLAINTS OR
CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(F)
At 10:03 p.m., Mayor Nelson announced that the City Council would meet in executive session to receive
and evaluate a complaint against a public officer or employee per RCW 42.30.110(1)(f). The executive
session is scheduled to last approximately 17 minutes. Elected officials present at the executive session
were Mayor Nelson and Councilmembers K. Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Olson, Paine,
Distelhorst, and L. Johnson. City Attorney Jeff Taraday was also present. The executive session
concluded at 10:20 p.m.
Mayor Nelson reconvened the meeting at 10:20 p.m.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10:30 P.M.
Councilmember L. Johnson made a friendly amendment that was accepted by Councilmember Olson, to
extend the meeting to 10:40 p.m.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Council reconvened in executive session on the matter previously stated. The executive session
concluded at 10:39 p.m.
Mayor Nelson reconvened the meeting at 10:39 p.m.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND FOR FIVE MINUTES TO TAKE A VOTE IN OPEN SESSION.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3) DUE TO LACK OF A SUPER MAJORITY,
COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE
VOTING NO. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.)
Councilmember K. Johnson asked whether Mayor Nelson could break the tie. Mr. Taraday answered no,
a motion to extend requires a super majority.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:41 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 25
Public Comment for 10/5/21 Council Meeting & 10/6 Open House on
Comprehensive Plan
From: Joan Bloom
Sent: Wednesday, October 6, 2021 11:35 AM
To: Chave, Rob <Rob.Chave@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien@edmondswa.gov>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment
(Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Ken Reidy <kenreidy@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Public input for tonight's Open House on waterfront issues as part of the Comprehensive
Plan update
Ken,
Did you blind copy Joe Scordino, Marjie Fields and Lora Petso on this comment? I’m sure they would be
interested. If you want me to forward, let me know.
Joan
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Wednesday, October 6, 2021 6:29 AM
To: Chave, Rob <Rob.Chave@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien@edmondswa.gov>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment
(Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public input for tonight's Open House on waterfront issues as part of the Comprehensive Plan
update
Submitting the following comments and questions as public input for tonight's Open House on
waterfront issues as part of the Comprehensive Plan update.
Thank you.
Ken Reidy
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2016 4:18 PM
To: Kristiana Johnson <kristiana.johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Adrienne Fraley-Monillas
<adrienne.monillas@edmondswa.gov>; Diane Buckshnis <diane.buckshnis@edmondswa.gov>; Michael
Nelson <michael.nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Neil Tibbott <neil.tibbott@edmondswa.gov>; David Teitzel
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 26
<david.teitzel@edmondswa.gov>; Thomas Mesaros <thomas.mesaros@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Lien, Kernen <kernen.lien@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Buffers and Setbacks
Please consider doing away with the confusion resulting from the concept that setbacks and buffers
overlap. If they are unlike each other - why say they can overlap? "Unlike zoning or shore setbacks,
buffer areas are intended to be left undisturbed, or may need to be enhanced to support natural
processes, functions and values." If setbacks are to protect the buffer as Mr. Anderson clearly stated -
how can a setback do that if some of the setback is included within the buffer? I simply do not see how
this makes any sense.
Both Mr. Pater and Mr. Anderson made it clear that the State prefers that they support each other - that
the setback extends from the edge of the buffer outward.
Also - this section of the approved July 12, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes includes at least 2 major
errors:
"Councilmember Teitzel referred to the description and definition buffers and setbacks. He read from a
document by Mr. Pater dated June 11, 2015, public comment responses, that defines buffers and
setbacks, “A buffer means an area adjacent to a critical area and/or shoreline that is required for
continued maintenance function and/or structural stability of the critical area and/or shoreline. Buffer
widths vary depending on the relative quality and sensitivity of the area being protected. Unlike zoning
or shore setbacks, shore setbacks are intended to be left undisturbed or may need to be enhanced to
support natural processes, functions and values. "Shore setback" means the minimum distance between
a structure or use and the shoreline ordinary high water mark. By definition, the buffer is adjacent to the
critical area or shoreline and the setback is measured from ordinary high water mark, so if there is both
a buffer and setback, they will necessarily overlap.” He asked if Mr. Pater still agreed with that
description. Mr. Pater responded they overlap but they really support each other. For example, Ecology
is proposing a 50-foot buffer and 50-foot setback from the buffer. It is common in newer SMPs to
combine the proposed buffer and the setback from the buffer to protect the integrity of the buffer. For
example, Island County has that in most designations. He did not see it as an overlap but rather one
supporting the other. There may be occasions like the marina which is all industrial pavement so there
would not be a buffer but a marginal setback. It depends on the situation how the buffers and setbacks
are applied. For example, at Harbor Square, the buffers when applied, do not match up to what exists
but could if the site goes through a major redevelopment."
"shore setbacks" should read "buffer areas"
"50-foot setback from the buffer" should read "15-foot setback from the buffer"
Please watch this section of the July 12, 2016 Council meeting again and you will clearly see that both
Mr. Pater and Mr. Anderson stressed that the setback is from the buffer.
Also - the following part of the minutes is miseading: "Mr. Pater responded they overlap but they really
support each other". Mr. Pater actually said the following:
"Ahh, well, I mean you could say they overlap but they really support each other...." Later, Mr. Pater
stated that he did not see it as an overlap but rather one supporting the other.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 27
Please keep it simple and treat buffers and setbacks like the State prefers - Ecology is proposing a 50-
foot buffer and 15-foot setback from the buffer.
Next, I'm pretty sure those public comment responses dated June 11, 2015 were prepared by the City -
not Mr. Pater.
One last thought - I am a little confused by Ecology's rationale that "The 15 foot buffer setback is
consistent with the SMP integrated critical areas regulations ECDC 24.40.280 (Building Setbacks)". Why
would Shore Setbacks need to be consistent with Building Setbacks - building setbacks don't have a
OHWM criteria - do they? This is just more confusing stuff - do we have both "shore setbacks" and
regular "setbacks" within the SMP?
Ken Reidy
From: Ian Higgins
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 6:11 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Bike Lanes
Dear Edmonds City Council,
I would like to voice my support the ' Alternative 1' bike lane proposal addressed at last months city
council meeting. I would also like to voice my support for bike lanes in general.
The 'Alternative 1' will slow car traffic by a total of 28 seconds. I honestly think this is a good thing. Do
we really want Edmonds to be a freeway? Opposing cyclist and pedestrian safety for a 28 second
shorter automobile trip is not living up to the 2011 Complete Streets Ordinance, and this opposition is
not helping to maintain the aspects of Edmonds I enjoy.
While I am an avid cyclist, I know many who are hesitant to ride their bikes on some of our busiest
roads, especially at night, especially in the rain. I believe that cycling, and our public roads are for
everyone not just for the cars, and not just for those of use daring enough to ride along side cars. Bike
lanes promote access to cycling as a hobby and as a mode of transportation.
In the face of threats to community cohesion we should be encouraging people to spend time
interacting with their community, not speeding by in 28 seconds. In the face of climate change we
should be encouraging people to reduce carbon emissions and not turing out town into a highway.
I ask the council to approve bike lane expansion in the City of Edmonds
- Ian
Ian Higgins
Edmonds, WA
98020
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 28
From: Diana K. White
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 5:10 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; LaFave, Carolyn <Carolyn.LaFave@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Questions regarding Indigenous People
To: Mayor Nelson and Council Members Buckshnis, Olson, Johnson, Distelhorst, Paine, Johnson, Fraley-
Monillas,
I was made aware that the City of Edmonds has recently taken the position that it will only cooperate
with ‘federally recognized’ Indian Tribes.
Speaking as an enrolled member of Prairie Band of Potawatomi Indians (federally recognized) and
advocate for all Indigenous Peoples, this position, if true, is inappropriate and misguided. The timing of
this decision also strangely correlates with the recent Blue Heron Canoe Family (Snohomish Tribe)
celebration on Aug. 1-2. The opening event was nearly derailed because the city permits were either
ignored or forgotten despite three detailed emails and a walk through of the premises.
Please help me understand the City of Edmonds position by answering the following questions:
1) Is this the official position of the City of Edmonds?
2) Has city council approved?
3) Have you sought legal advice on this issue?
4) Have you communicated this new change of policy/position to the public?
5) Is this decision in response to a request from a federally recognized tribe to a perceived threat?
Federal recognition can be a decades long, politically fraught, controversial journey for tribes to endure
as they fight to save a culture of peoples who colonial settlers intended to abolish. Federal recognition
was given to many bands and tribes in the region at the Point Elliott Treaty in 1855 near Mukilteo.
During treaty negotiations across the U.S., many tribes were unaware, misrepresented or absent as land
was ceded for promises never kept by the U.S. Government.
Thankfully, the City of Edmonds has passed Indigenous Peoples Day, and performs land
acknowledgement statements, but how can the City of Edmonds truly call themselves advocates for
Indigenous People with a policy position that is exclusionary and politically fraught? What gives City of
Edmonds the right to determine which tribes are worthy to do business with? Consider the intolerable
message this city is sending to some tribes--that you don’t belong here, you are invisible, and unworthy-
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 29
-which is how Indigenous people have been treated for hundreds of years. We can and must do better
than this.
With Indigenous Peoples Day quickly approaching, I urge City Leadership to learn about issues of
contemporary Indigenous Peoples. We are not a history lesson of forgotten people whose future was
signed away in treaties. We are people who want to be recognized, acknowledged, and become an
integral part of the communities where we live, serve, and protect. We want to educate our schools and
communities about the truth of Indigenous Peoples everywhere, regardless of government status. I ask
you, City of Edmonds leadership, do you see me?
Diana White
Edmonds Resident
Prairie Band of Potawatomi Indians
Blue Heron Canoe Family
From: Kim Bayer
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 9:40 AM
To: Ken Reidy <kenreidy@hotmail.com>; Paine, Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Nelson, Michael
<Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen
<Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Re: Public Comments for the October 5, 2021 City Council Meeting
Susan,
Did your job you were elected to do and please respond now to Ken Reidy’s multiple emails.
You serve citizens - no one else.
Kim
Kim Bayer-Augustavo
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 6:33 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Nelson, Michael
<Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen
<Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comments for the October 5, 2021 City Council Meeting
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 30
Specific to my emails related to the May 5, 2020 City Council discussion of City Code Chapter 6.60, 2021
City Council President Susan Paine has chosen to not respond to 14 emails I have sent her at the
following times:
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 7:02 AM
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 5:56 AM
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 6:23 AM
Sent: Sunday, March 7, 2021 6:44 AM
Sent: Sunday, March 7, 2021 7:04 AM
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2021 7:10 AM
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2021 7:52 AM
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 1:20 PM
Sent: Saturday, June 5, 2021 11:41 AM
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2021 7:01 AM
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 1:11 PM
Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 5:53 AM
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 5:27 AM
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 7:05 AM
Citizens have no way on knowing when City Code Chapter 6.60 will be fixed, when the new CEMP will be
presented to Council for approval or whether we even have a functional emergency plan.
This topic is very important as it involves public health and safety. I encourage all City Officials to
immediately make sure our citizens are protected by a functional Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan (CEMP)- a plan that is current and practiced on a regular basis.
I have now been provided an email sent by Council President Susan Paine to Councilmember Vivian
Olson dated September 15, 2020 in which Susan Paine claims:
"EdMonds has been updating the CEMP every other year without fail for the past 6 yrs."
Please see that email attached. Please provide the details of the updates Susan Paine refers to at
once. The CEMP on the City's website indicates it was updated April 18, 2017.
Please inform all citizens when the employment of the last Safety and Disaster Coordinator ended, and
when the City expects to fill that vacant position.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 31
Please keep the community informed on municipal affairs and encourage communications between
the citizens and all municipal officers. Please emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public
and each other and please seek to improve the quality of public service, and confidence of citizens.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 32
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 33
From: joe scordino <joe.scordino@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 2:15 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff
<jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Richardson, Zachary <Zachary.Richardson@edmondswa.gov>;
Williams, Phil <Phil.WIlliams@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: My dismay with Council deliberations on public hearing on stormwater code update
Please see my comment on the My Edmonds News article about the Council meeting (linked below).
Either I have misunderstood the purpose of public hearing agenda items (in contrast with public
comment agenda items), or the Council is not following proper procedures in discussing/deliberating on
the public input provided during a public hearing.
City staff clearly stated that they were requesting Council direction and potential changes to their
proposed stormwater code update, and NUMEROUS public input was provided questioning the
sufficiency of the code update in actually helping fix the continuing and increasing damage caused to
private property and public resources by excess stormwater.
Yet, the Council Chair closed the agenda item without having Council discussion/deliberation on the
public input (both oral and written from both the 9/21 and 9/28 Council meetings). For Council
members to say there was no action required on the agenda item is flat out wrong - the action was to
discuss public input from the public hearing and DECIDE if the Council wanted to have staff modify their
proposed code changes at this point in the process, or ask that a process commence to make changes in
other codes or the Comprehensive Plan to address stormwater issues outside the purview of the
stormwater code. Otherwise, why did the Council extend the public hearing into the 9/28 meeting?
The citizens of Edmonds deserve transparency and accountability on what is going on in the City. Where
is the Perrinville Restoration Plan that the Mayor promised would be made available for public
input? Why isn't Lynnwood at the table? How will the $3.5 million be spent and how much more is it
going to cost to actually fix the stormwater damage and continuing problems?
Council hears update on Hwy 99 signs, discusses stormwater code, votes to continue virtual meetings
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 5, 2021
Page 34
Council hears update on Hwy 99 signs, discusses
stormwater code, votes t...
After asking staff a month ago to obtain more public input
on possible design options for the Highway 99 Gateway...