Loading...
cmd110921 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL VIRTUAL ONLINE SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES November 9, 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 Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Dave Turley, Finance Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE The Edmonds City Council virtual online special meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Distelhorst read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: “We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.” 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely. 4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why there were no Council Comments or Mayor Comments on the agenda. Council President Paine answered they are not normally scheduled on committee nights; they will be on next week’s agenda. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is a special meeting, a Council meeting of the whole. She observed they could not be added to the agenda. Council President Paine Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 2 agreed they could not be added as the Council has gotten into some legal trouble going out of bounds with OPMA so the agenda is set for a special meeting. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 1, 2021 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 3. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM CATHARINE ANDRY 4. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE FOR THE 2021 OVERLAY PROJECT 5. REGULAR PROPERTY TAX ORDINANCE FOR 2022 TAX LEVY AND EMS LEVY ORDINANCE 6. APPROVAL FOR DISPOSAL OF BIOSOLIDS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, relayed My Edmonds News reported Council President Paine said Sunday via email that she didn’t schedule a Finance Committee because with the full Council meeting it’s mainly on City finance and budget. Council Presidents do not schedule committee meetings; the City Code is very clear that the Finance Committee is a standing committee and that regular meetings of City Council standing committees shall be held on the second Tuesday of every month. The Finance Committee shall commence at 6 p.m. and end at 7:30 p.m.; shall is mandatory. He asked why the Finance Committee meeting was not taking place this very second. Tonight’s 6:30 p.m. special meeting is in conflict with the City Code. Council President Paine could have canceled tonight’s standing Finance Committee meeting if any of the codified reasons for canceling a meeting applied to the situation, none do. He wondered what made Council President Paine think standing committee meetings were subject to her scheduling and what made her think tonight was a full Council meeting; tonight’s meeting, wrongly scheduled during the Finance Committee’s time slot, is a special meeting, not a regular meetings. Regular meetings of the whole Council do not take place on the second Tuesday of the month. The Finance Committee should be reviewing the September this very second. Mr. Reidy continued, this important review has been included on multiple extended agendas. Last year the Finance Committee reviewed the September 2020 Quarterly Financial Report on November 12, 2020, more than a month before the 2021 budget was adopted on December 15, 2020. No notice of cancellation of the standing Finance Committee meeting has been posted as required by ECC 1.04.040. Cancellation is also not noted on the City Council’s meeting calendar like cancellation of the March 9, 2021 Public Safety, Personnel and Planning Committee was. Council President Paine has not represented she cancelled the Finance Committee meeting; she said she did not schedule it which is much different; again, standing meetings don’t need to be scheduled. He was unsure how Council President Paine will be able to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 3 resolve all the issues she has created by acting like she has discretion to schedule or not schedule standing meetings. What a mess. He asked the Council to improve conduct and ensure City Council Presidents are provided proper training. Rebecca Anderson, Edmonds, thanked the residents who were listening. She looked forward to returning to in-person public City meetings as being together in person removes barriers and strengthens relationships, something the community could use right now, strengthen relationships and improving communications. She was grateful to live in this country, but unfortunately there is currently a trend where if anything is said that upsets someone else, instead of having an opportunity to explain oneself in a civil matter, you are at risk of being canceled. She questioned whether anyone wanted to revisit what happened to Edmonds when someone decorated a street with three words, or build the wall cookie, she did not. Ms. Anderson continued, instead of taking to social media as a person did who disliked the sugar cookie in 2019, she read into public record a recent letter to editor posted on My Edmonds News today regarding a retweet by Council President Paine: On 10/29/21 (three days prior to the election), Susan Paine, Edmonds City Council president retweeted trash talk about three candidates running for City Council. The original tweet came from someone who goes by Edmonds Eats. She retweeted publicly through Twitter: “Know what’d be REALLY scary? Sleazeball Neil Tibbott, fake Janelle Cass, and unwell Kristiana Johnson making decisions about Edmonds the next 4 years. They’ve deliberately lied and skirted laws while trying to get our votes. Imagine what they’d do if they don’t need them.” Is this how a city council president should behave? Doesn’t this go against the Code of conduct Susan is presiding over? She should be removed from overseeing the rewriting our City Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics as she clearly does not follow them. As an Edmonds citizen, you should be extremely disappointed in Susan Paine. Shame on her for sharing this damaging tweet about candidates running. She needs to apologize to all involved. Myself, along with many other concerned Edmonds residents, hope this poor lack of judgment is made public. I believe it is the only way for Susan to stop these type of damaging actions, especially as council president. We deserve so much better from our elected leaders. Kim Bayer- Augustavo, Edmonds.” As an Edmonds resident, Ms. Anderson asked the Council President to explain why she retweet the tweet she did on October 29th, whether she stands by the tweet, and is that how she believes a sitting Councilmember should conduct themselves in public? Beth Fleming, Edmonds, shared her disappointment with the lack of transparency of City government as it pertains to the 2022 budget review process. This was not her first time calling in to express concern about the budget being unnecessarily rushed. She cited the lack of communication to residents in general. Yesterday a citizen went to City Hall and took a photo of the posted public notice regarding the 2022 budget. It was the outdated, old schedule which reflected a much longer time frame, not the current timeframe that has a November 16th vote date which is Councilmember Distelhorst’s last meeting to vote on the budget. Between that time and today, a new notice was put up on City Hall reflecting the updated timeline. The new notice had a date of 10/15 and reflected the new, shorter timeline and said it was valid as of 10/15 which is untrue. The notice was not posted on the door of City Hall on 10/15 and it was unsigned. When it came up in conversation on My Edmonds News [inaudible] put up a notice that was proper and backdated it to make everyone think that it had been up since 10/15 which it had not. It had been up for less than 24 hours when a new picture was taken of it. When she checked the City’s website today for meeting information, it stated the next Council meeting was November 4th and tonight’s meeting was not posted. Mr. Reidy informed her that tonight’s meeting started at 6:30 p.m. when she posted on MEN that the meeting started at 7:00. However, that wasn’t posted on the City’s website and the website did not reflect that a meeting was being held tonight. She checked at 5:00 and it had been updated and listed the start time as 6:30 but citizens did not have any advance notice that this meeting would start at 6:30 which she found sort of shady. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 4 Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, spoke regarding the tree ordinance the Council passed earlier this year. They love trees and purchased a steep 1.2 acre property filled with trees and would like to build three homes, but doing so requires they remove some trees. They have 172 trees above 6” DBH; spreading your arms out on their property, you will touch a tree. The ordinance has made it very expensive for anyone to purchase property with trees where some need to be removed to build a house. It is discriminatory since everyone else in Edmonds lives on property where trees were cut down. The Council targeted not only them but other families who seek to divide property to build much needed homes in single family zoned areas. The ordinance discriminates against people taking risks to fulfill the housing needs of the community and lowers property values by the assumed value of trees. It is difficult for arborists and architects to keep up with the way things are going in the planning department. This is precious time the Council has taken from allowing them to live closer to her parents; they wanted to build houses closer to each other, one level homes, which will no longer be possible. [connection lost] Michelle Dotsch, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 7.2, Public hearing and Deliberations on the 2022 Budget scheduled for 90 minutes. She was unable to competently prepare any comments to be included in the public hearing on the budget as there are currently no meeting minutes available from the City Council regular meeting of October 26, 2021 or special meeting of November 1, 2021 where City business on the 2022 budget took place. The minutes are not included in the November 9, 2021 agenda packet nor found anywhere on the City’s website for review by members of the public who may have been out of town, like herself and could not attend the meetings and take notes or those who could not stay up for the full 3-4 hours that those meetings took. Her only option is to watch both of those videos for over seven hours to try and figure out what was presented and said without any notes to reference. She should be able to quickly scan the meeting minutes whether they are approved or in draft form. Those highly necessary meeting notes are still not available tonight, the same evening she is expected to competently participate in only one of two public hearing opportunities regarding adoption of the 2022 City of Edmonds budget. She found this unacceptable and demonstrates that these are unprepared, rushed special meetings with no purpose other than an artificial deadline that shuts out equitable participation from the public at their own public hearing. She urged the Council to cancel tonight’s public hearing on the 2022 budget and properly notice and provide all forms of documentation necessary ahead of time as needed for the public to properly participate at a public hearing as critical as the 2022 City budget which will decide how the public’s tax dollars will be spent. Linda Ferkingstad continued her comments, the City of Edmonds is listed as fully participating in the Washington Growth Management Act. This Council has violated the following GMA initiatives in the past year: 1) encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner, 2) reduce sprawl, 3) applications for both State and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability, and 4) private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. The term taking comes the final clause of the 5th amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Washington State has a similar clause in Section 16 of Article 1 of the State Constitution as does Edmonds in its Comprehensive Plan. It is based upon the premise of when government action reduces the value of property, the governmental entity that is taking that action, whether by ordinance, zoning, regulation, legislation or any other regulatory action must pay the property owner compensation, not fine the property owner for the reduced value of the property. She urged Councilmembers to abide by the laws of our country, state and city as the rest of us have to. Undeveloped property values have sunk in Edmonds for people trying to build in single family zones. She requested the Council give them back their trees and make this right before Edmonds taxpayers have to compensate for the Council’s illegal actions in court. Carolyn Strong, Edmonds, said she sees shenanigans everywhere she looks coming from Council. There is one budget schedule posted for the budget at City Hall and another elsewhere so citizens don’t Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 5 know when to comment, tune in or give opinions. Then suddenly the schedule is changed a couple days before a meeting, unsigned, falsely claims when it was posted, and conflicts with another scheduled meeting that should be taking place now. Instead it is a budget meeting, held a half hour earlier than a normal meeting, confusing those who want to comment on the budget. She asked whether tonight’s Finance Committee meeting was properly canceled with due notice; she did not think so and saw that as more shenanigans. She questioned the rush to pass the budget without giving citizens due notice and making all efforts to seek the input of the people whose money the Council plans to spent. Voters have selected a new Councilmember to represent them in this budget and that person should have input, not an appointed Councilmember. Each candidate worked hard all year to earn the right to represent the people of the City; cutting them out of the process is another shenanigan by the Council majority and the citizens see this. Ms. Strong spoke to the behavior of Council President Paine participating in social media cyberbullying of citizens, local businesses, political candidates and fellow Councilmembers. She found her behavior as unacceptable and said she should resign over this Code of Conduct breech as she should be condemning this bullying, not encouraging it. She is not the only one, just the most outrageous one on the City Council participating in this and not condemning the behavior. Councilmember L. Johnson and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas also participated in berating citizens that disagreed with their political agenda on multiple social media platforms. This bullying behavior will not be tolerated. The two who were not voted out should resign immediately; these are more than shenanigans, disgusting acts of hate that encourage dangerous behavior that can cause physical and financial harm to citizens. This is coming from elected leaders and is some of the most outrageous conduct she has ever witnessed. She requested Council President Paine and Councilmember L. Johnson resign and that Councilmember Fraley-Monillas resign immediately; the people have spoken and they are tired of shenanigans, of their bullying, of their disregard for the citizens of Edmonds. Jenny Kower, Edmonds, referred to budget decision package 1 regarding the REDI program manager. Mayor Nelson suggested comments regarding the budget occur during the public hearing. Ms. Kower asked for clarification regarding the position and read the item description, Under the direction of the mayor, the city’s race, equity, diversity and inclusion program manager provides citywide leadership to advance the city’s race, equity, diversity and inclusion goal. Position will provide advice and consultation to city departments on equity and inclusion principles and practices, provide strategic technical guidance and policy direction of the city’s diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Help coordinate implementation of the city’s equity roadmap and oversee the update of the roadmap as needed and facilitate the city’s organizational equity team. Justification for this position is listed as, “Under the direction of the mayor, the city’s REDI program manager provides citywide leadership to advance the city’s race, equity, diversity and inclusion goal. The position will provide advice and consultation to city departments on equity and inclusion principles and practices, provide strategic technical guidance and policy direction of the city’s diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Help coordinate implementation of the city’s equity roadmap and oversee the update of the roadmap as needed and facilitate the city’s organizational equity team.” Ms. Kower said the dictionary definition of the word “justification” is the action of showing something to be reasonable. She was trying to understand what the justification was for this position when in essence the justification merely repeats verbatim the item description. She did not understand the justification for the position, especially with a $156,000 salary. She asked for clarity regarding justification for the position, whether there is really that much issue regarding diversity. Susan Hughes, Edmonds, expressed concern about rushing the City’s budget and wondered why there was no Finance Committee meeting tonight. She questioned how the Council President arbitrarily canceled the Finance Committee meeting, anticipating it was a violation of the City Code. She questioned how Council could vote on the 2022 budget package when they did not have the current finance report. These are taxpayers’ monies and should be of the utmost importance. She questioned why the 2022 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 6 budget schedule posted on the front door of City Hall wasn’t followed. The schedule was replaced yesterday with a shortened timeframe. She questioned how citizens are supposed to keep things straight when last minute changes are made that violate City Code. She asked whether the Council thought citizens trusted the Councilmember have studied and researched all the budget packets. Councilmembers cannot haphazardly jump around in the 100 decision packets, there needs to be a process or flowchart to follow, reviews and decision points. The Council plans to vote on the budget when they cannot even maintain a schedule for review and discussion, let alone review the current financial state. Ms. Hughes found it hard to understand why a defined process was not being followed or was there no process, no flow or steps and was the Council just making it up as they go along. Citizens need to understand the process the Council is following; these are citizens’ tax dollars and it is extremely important that the City Council have a well-defined and transparent process for reviewing and discussing the budget, let alone an established schedule. There needs to be a deep dive into the costliest area, administrative heads. She questioned why more people were being added, why a full-time REDI program manager was being added and why the City would do a roof top solar grant program when that is provided by PUD and there are federal solar tax credits, a state energy tax credit and a state sale and use tax for solar. There are so many questions on the decision packages that need to be addressed and answered. She urged the Council to look at what has been going on and make adjustments to ensure a responsible outcome to the budget is achieved. Julie Johnson, Edmonds, expressed concern the budget was being rushed with no time for input or revision. She questioned why it was being rushed when in years past it was not voted on until mid- December. The budget also appears to dip into reserves for operating costs; that cannot be done with one’s home budget, how can it be done with the City budget. Frankly, this rush job smacks of the chief of police debacle which we don’t want to repeat. She was informed at the last-minute that this meeting had been changed to an earlier time; this late, last-minute change lacks transparency on the part of this administration. She referred to the streateries, finding them ugly and unsafe, impeding pedestrian safety and making the once charming city feel like Hooverville. She felt safer walking in the streets than she did on the sidewalks in her neighborhood; some are safe and others are very unsafe and some of her neighbors have fallen and been seriously injured. She hoped the Council would take her comments to heart and that their votes would reflect how much they took her comments to heart. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, reviewed what occurred at the special meeting of October 12, 2021 which in his opinion was a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act as Council President Paine said during the request to add Mayor and City Comments. At the beginning of the October 12, 2021 meeting, Councilmember Buckshnis moved to add Public Comments. She was interrupted by City Attorney Tom Brubaker before the motion was seconded, advising her it is a special meeting and nothing can be added to the agenda and take a vote. But what occurred on October 12th was hot off the press, Mr. Brubaker had had long discussions with the other City Attorney Jeff Taraday, who the City is paying over $500,000, who said the Mayor can’t give a person an $8,000 bonus in lieu of moving expenses and accrued vacation time. This wasn’t on the agenda and the public had no idea the new Development Services Director lives less than 1.5 miles from City Hall, yet the City is giving her $8,000 in lieu of moving expenses when it would be less than a 15 minute walk from her home to City Hall. This was a violation of the OPMA and he plans to pursue this in court because the Council was advised at the beginning of the meeting that adding something to agenda and voting on it was illegal. Sandy Higgins, Edmonds, expressed concern about the City’s budget and why it seems to be being rushed to be approved. A budget is a serious and deliberate endeavor and needs to be treated as such. Please do not rush through this process. She loved the idea of having a municipal office on Highway 99 near Safeway, the area where she lives and believed it would be a valuable and advantageous center for the community. Sidewalks in Edmonds are in dire shape and in need of repair. She watches her steps Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 7 carefully so she is not tripped up. She was surprised there hadn’t been a serious accident resulting in injury or loss. She recommended the Council prioritize the City’s sidewalks. She was prepared for a 7 p.m. meeting tonight and was surprised to learn it had been changed to 6:30; how or why did this last- minute change occur? She urged the Council to see that the streateries are removed; they were good for keeping restaurants in business during the emergency but it is time for them to go. They are hideous and take away from parking, walking space and the charm of the lovely city. She thanked the Council for listening and for their service. Tamara Nelson, Edmonds, said she would like to return to live Council meetings where citizens and Council can see each other’s expressions. Those who cannot meet in person for health reasons should be afforded the opportunity for a hybrid meeting. Meeting on Zoom does not increase transparency and does not help citizens feel better about what is happening in government at the moment. She echoed the request to get rid of the streateries; the streets and sidewalks belong to the public and now in many areas pedestrian have to walk between tables when walking along the sidewalk. It is very difficult to park and although she knew Mayor Nelson would like to eliminate all cars, but that is not reality. When it’s raining and people would like to support retail businesses, it is very difficult when restaurants have hogged all the parking spaces and additional parking spaces are reserved for picking up to-go orders. She summarized it was time for that to end. She was quite upset that the budget was being rushed. There are two lame ducks on City Council and the newly elected Councilmembers have been in contact with citizens and learning what they want. She found it disingenuous to shove the budget through. She hoped the Council was listening to citizens’ comments and reading MEN where this sentiment has been expressed repeatedly. She was opposed to growing government where it wasn’t needed and with dipping into the reserves because that is not sustainable. The City needs to stay within its budget just like residents do in their personal budgets. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, expressed her deep concern about the continual disregard for public involvement and adherence to City Code. As of this past Sunday, the public hearing notice posted on the front door of City Hall, signed by the City Clerk, lists the following schedule for consideration of citizen comments: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 second public hearing on the 2022 proposed budget, Council deliberations and adoption of the 2022-2027 CIP/CFP plans; Tuesday, November 23, 2021 Council deliberation and adoption of the 2022 City budget; Tuesday, December 7, 2021, adoption of the 2022 City budget if necessary. This schedule seems reasonable and likely was set in a way to accommodate the standing second Tuesday committee meetings. In other words, it was a schedule set to abide by the law. According to Edmonds City Code, the Finance Committee meeting is a standing meeting; while there are certain circumstances that would allow the Council President to cancel a meeting, this did not happen for tonight’s meeting. She asked where is the public notice for its cancelation? For what reason was this important committee meeting canceled? What authorizes Council President Paine to eliminate a standing meeting. Ms. Cass continued, it seemed to her, as a business owner, that having the third quarter financials presented and discussed would be vital to the conversation about the 2022 budget. Anyone who runs a business knows this; why would you not want the stockholders to be aware of such critical information as they take place and are important for planning the budget. In the military, as many veterans may remember, when someone fails to do something correctly, the question is asked whether it is a will problem or a skill problem. She asked Council President Paine if she was willfully breaking the City Codes or was she in need of training about City Code and how to plan out a calendar and an agenda. It is understandable that [inaudible] on the code given how Edmonds codes are in serious need of a rewrite and are complex, requiring legal guidance for compliance. This then begs the question, did the City Attorney who the City is paying $700,000 per year give her guidance on erasing a standing Finance Committee meeting. If Mr. Taraday is not properly guiding Council on City Codes, then perhaps that Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 8 contract needs a deep review and reconsideration. She requested tonight’s public hearing on the 2022 budget be canceled and return to the originally posted schedule. Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, said she was upset when she saw what Council President Paine wrote today although she kind of liked her. She understood sometimes people get upset and did not think she needed to be recalled; there has been enough hate for everybody. She apologized to Mayor Nelson about the things she said about his wife. She saw a lot of Facebook and was told by someone that she was a very moderate democrat when they first met and when she supported her in the beginning. She has proof of the emails and takes photos of comments that people make to her. She has been repeatedly attacked, not by Felicia personally. When Ms. Anderson was advised she had 30 seconds remaining, she requested she be allowed additional time to speak. She referred to a Zoom meeting and a post where people called her an idiot and told her she should not be posting, she couldn’t find A from B, and that she writes slow and cannot people understand what she is saying. When Ms. Anderson’s three minutes expired, she again asked for additional time to speak. Mayor Nelson commented unfortunately other people are waiting to comment and there is a public hearing. He suggested she try speaking at another meeting. Ms. Anderson said that wasn’t okay. Kim Bayer-Augustavo, Edmonds, spoke about what she saw as a very transparent attempt to rush the 2022 budget process. Everyone knows why it’s being rushed, it’s already been called out; it’s because Mayor Nelson and Council President Paine need Councilmember Distelhorst’s vote before he vacates his Council seat. It’s wrong on all accounts. There have been numerous citizen emails and letters to the editor of the local papers requesting that the Council delay budget decision so citizens they have elected to serve have the appropriate time and notice to provide input. Public hearing dates are not supposed to be changed without a committee meeting to do so; this obviously did not occur and Council President Paine did it on her own with no proper public notice or reason. Mayor Nelson and Council President Paine have shown complete distain and disrespect for their constituents by choosing to move forward with tonight’s public hearing. It is quite obvious they want the budget approved without having to answer to new thinking on the Council. Citizens will continue to hold them accountable for ongoing violations of the City Code and a complete abuse of power and a list of violations is being sent to the State Auditor’s Office. The Council should be on notice of a legal fight coming their way if they move forward with this rushed and what the citizens are seeing as a very illegal budget process. She requested the Council, including Council President Paine and Councilmember L. Johnson please do the right thing. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on planned future expenditures identified in the Public Works and Parks Capital Improvement Plans. Since there has been significant discussion about moving the marsh to Parks, she reviewed SalmonScape mapping for the City of Edmonds. SalmonScape was created by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to “deliver scientific information to those involved in on the ground salmon recovery projects. To help salmon recovery planners identify and prioritize habitat restoration activities that offer the greatest benefit to fish.” She was surprised to learn the marsh was not identified for chinook and that the only water body in the city that is identified for chinook is Lake Ballinger. Given the results of her initial research, salmon distribution and gradient of the streams that discharge to the marsh, she thought 75% was an incredibly optimistic grant funding target which may be why it has been identified within Public Works plans in order to create justification for realistic, local funding pathway. Ms. Seitz relayed her understanding that BNSF intends to build a second rail line. The City should look into what can be accomplished at this site thorough its existing or potential future critical area ordinances in conjunction with HPA and 404 permit requirements. It seems likely that many of the salmon-related benefits could be achieved at no cost to the City if the City could be patient with this area and give up the idea of this project as an additional open space resource for the bowl. It would also avoid the need for MTCA related liability for the site which also limits the site’s restoration potential. She requested the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 9 Council consider pushing out funding for this project until a strategic review of regulatory requirements in relation to project goals is complete. A science-based approach is for the City to focus its salmon recovery efforts in the only water body in the City identified as gradient accessible to chinook and nearby to identified chinook spawning locations, Lake Ballinger, located in the SR-99/uptown area. She hoped the City would consider spending staff resources and funding in excess of those currently proposed for the marsh in recognition that Lake Ballinger is a higher priority salmon resource than the marsh as identified by the WDFW. The SR-99 corridor is currently underserved by park and open space resources and has significant stormwater issues. Denise Shaw Cooper, Edmonds, congratulated Neil Tibbott and Councilmember K. Johnson for their wins; the voters spoke loud and proud. She was sorry to see the news that Council President Paine was trashing Neil Tibbott and Councilmember K. Johnson on Twitter. She asked how Edmonds will have a working Council with discourse in the air and asked where is civility. The citizens voted out Councilmembers who did not support all citizens. Bullying should not occur by Council. She has personally felt bullied by a candidate that lost the election. Council example sets the tone; be better, be professional, bring back civility. Why is the budget being rushed? Why is a meeting time changed? “Who is on first Luke? Voted out lately? Go ride your bike.” She urged citizen to listen and watch. She summarized citizens are all watching Councilmembers and she urged them to be better. She spoke in favor of sidewalks, commenting she lives on a school street where there are no sidewalks and it’s dangerous. She urged Councilmember K. Johnson to keep pushing for the conduct code, noting she would vote for her as many times as she wanted to run. Kevin Smith, Edmonds, commented he was sure Councilmembers had read national news stories in the last few months about major social media conglomerates deliberately encouraging and pumping negative and divisive political posts as this type of engagement gets the most looks, engagement and views and hence added revenue. They do this despite knowing that derogative political commentary on social media was directly contributing to the further polarization of our political systems and furthering the mental health crisis in the country. In searching Twitter for commentary on the recent election over the weekend, he noticed Council President Paine’s retweet of an anonymous Twitter handle a few days before the election that derogatorily leveled personal attacks against three candidates including calling one candidate a sleazeball, another fake and the other as unwell. This anonymous retweet also leveled accusations against the same candidates about lying and skirting laws. Needless to say, he found this type of political speech incredibly disappointing. Coming from an elected official, this cannot be described in any way other than bullying. Mr. Smith continued, retweeting or liking posts such as those from Council President Paine is telling the youth, including the Council Student Representative, that the way you get what you want politically is to call your opponents derogatory names and level serious accusations without underlying evidence. A former baseball coach of his once said if you don’t like an umpire’s call, never level personal attacks. You can question the action, but develop rapport. The minute you resort to personal attacks, you have lost all respect. This was a hard campaign season and there’s no doubt that either the candidates or some supports of all candidates engaged in divisive speech, but from his observations, the candidates themselves mostly discussed issues and behaviors of their opponents without leveling personal attacks. Council President Paine’s retweet took this political speech to a new level. We must be better than this; healthy debate on issues or discord on the behavior of Councilmembers is a core part of democracy. Derogatory slurs like those leveled in this situation accomplish nothing except actively encouraging citizens to engage in hate speech. On a recent pod cast, former presidential candidate Andrew Yang said it best, at the end of the day, we’re all part of the same community. Just because we have differing views doesn’t mean we have to spew hate towards each other. (Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 10 Council President Paine requested the City Clerk address the issue of minutes. City Clerk Scott Passey explained he informed the Council President, and in hindsight probably should have informed the full Council, that the Council’s minutes writer would not be able to do the October 26th and November 1st minutes due to a scheduled medical procedure. There are no other options for preparing the minutes so there will be a delay in the production of the minutes. He apologized for the inconvenience and said he would try to get them done as soon as possible. Councilmember Buckshnis said that was the same explanation given at the last meeting or at the special meeting, noting all the meetings are running together except for the Finance Committee meeting which never happened. She asked for a date when the minutes will be available, noting citizens are contacting Councilmembers requesting that information. Mr. Passey answered he would like to have the October 26th minutes in the next packet. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. NEIGHBORHOOD CITY OFFICE LEASE TERMS AND BUDGET APPROVAL Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed: • Background o The Mayor and City Councilmembers have been discussing the importance of increased investment and presence in the Highway 99 Corridor o One initiative the Mayor proposed in his 2021 State of the City Address was to establish a satellite city office in the Corridor. o A permanent solution will likely be a natural outgrowth of the Community Renewal Plan for the southern stretch of the Highway 99 (“Uptown”) area – be that single-use, multi-use, public, public-private or any combination. o In the interim, and essentially as a pilot for any permanent investment, the Administration has sought a temporary location to establish the City’s presence there o For several months City staff have visited and perused the Corridor, as well as contacted real estate brokers, to find any potential candidates for a “Neighborhood City Office.” o Desired program consists of: ▪ Reception/”front desk” area with public access to City computer and Court electronic kiosk, initially staffed 4 hours per day with dedicated staff person ▪ Larger conference room to accommodate “Community Court” 2 to 4 times/month and community or staff meetings other times ▪ Break-out area for defendant/attorney discussions ▪ Office for Police Department Community Engagement Officer ▪ Work stations for Police Officers working in the area to stop in, do paper work, meet public, etc. ▪ Adequate parking o Several criteria guided the search effort: ▪ Storefront-type space for visibility and accessibility ▪ Easy to access for pedestrians, vehicles, and transit riders ▪ Preference for a location in the southern stretch of Highway 99 Corridor (Community ▪ Renewal Plan area) ▪ Size (sufficient to accommodate the stated Program) ▪ Cost • Current Proposal o After visiting several sites, three options were considered more closely: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 11 ▪ A tenant space in a small commercial strip center with storefront presence, but it was larger than our requirements and needed upwards of $275,000 in tenant improvements ▪ A mobile office unit on one of two sites, but this option would provide tight spaces, less likely able accommodate desired Program, and may not convey the right image for the City ▪ A more recently discovered vacant and available tenant space in the “Aurora MarketPlace” shopping center, anchored by Safeway, at 23632 Highway 99, Space 2100 o Aurora Market Place Shopping Center, Space 2100 ▪ Vicinity map ▪ Aerial map ▪ Photograph of building exterior ▪ Floor Plan • Key Lease Terms o Landlord: Regency Centers, L.P., or its affiliates or assigns o Tenant: City of Edmonds please provide Legal entity o Size: Approximately 1,309 square feet. o Permitted Use: The Tenant will use the premises for general office space for its City officials within the City of Edmonds as an outreach to its community and for no other purpose (the “Permitted Use”). o Primary Lease Term: 3 years. o Minimum Annual Rent: $32 psf (*Reduced rental rate due to City Offices) o Min. Annual Rent Increases: 3% annual increases per lease year. o Option Terms: One (3) year options behind the initial 3-year term at market rate. o Additional Rent: This is a triple net lease. Tenant shall be responsible for the payment of their pro rata share of the real estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance, beginning on the Commencement Date and continuing throughout the Term of this Lease. These charges are currently estimated to be $ 8.82 per square foot, broken down as follows: CAM charge - $ 6.20 RET charge - $ 1.71 Insurance charge - $0.92 o Parking spaces: Tenant will have two exclusive parking spaces for their Police Cars to park in, location of those spaces to be agreed upon during lease negotiations o TI Allowance: $20/SF = $26,180 o Utilities, etc.: Tenant pays utilities • Summary of 2022 Costs Item Month Year Tenant Improvements (TI) $43,000 Fixtures, Furnishings, Equipment $12,00 Contribution from Court ($10,000) Owner TI Allowance ($26,180) TOTAL ONE-TIME COSTS $18,820 Lease + NNN $4,453 $53,433 Util/IT/Security $1,500 $18,000 .5 FTE staff (salary & benefits) $30,000 Subtotal $101,433 Contingency @ 10% $10,143 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 12 TOTAL ONGOING COSTS $111,576 TOTAL 2022 NET COST ESTIMATE $130,396 • Next Steps o Council Actions 1. Approve Lease Terms 2. Authorize Mayor Nelson to execute corresponding contract on behalf of the City. If the lease contract is signed before the end of 2021, a deposit of the first month's rent of $3,490.67 will be due upon contract execution. This expenditure can be considered and approved by City Council as part of the Fourth Quarter Budget Adjustments. 3. Direct staff to include related 2022 expenditures as additional line item for Council approval in 2022 Budget approval process. Councilmember Olson thanked staff for all their work, specifically Mr. Doherty, recognizing a lot of thought and effort went into this. She also thanked Mayor Nelson for the idea. She was ecstatic about most parts but wanted to make some small points. In terms of when the lease starts, the office is open for business and paying the rent, she asked if there was any lag time that reflects the time to make improvements go get it up and running as well as reflecting that none of the City’s offices are open to the public. She preferred not to pay rent for the months the offices weren’t open if there was a way to work around that. Mr. Doherty asked he heard from the broker that the corporate for Regency Centers will probably take over a month to get the lease to the City, so mid-December before the City has a lease to sign. The actual opening date would be negotiated at that time, likely a month or more from then to allow for tenant improvements, and obtaining furniture, fixtures and equipment. He will negotiate for the rent to start after that period, when the office can open. City facilities were close to opening again in the last few days before a decision was made to delay through the end of 2021 due to plateauing cases and uncertainty whether they were going down enough. That will be revisited in January so it is possible the office could open within the first month of 2022. Councilmember Olson said it was important to her that this was a 3-year commitment and not a forever commitment because there has not been as much engagement with the community about the location. She appreciated having these things started there as well as that the City was not locked in forever. The part she did not support was staffing the office with a part-time customer service person and adding that recurring expense to the budget. She preferred to rotate other staff members or even Councilmembers through the office. The input from the community that it is more about support for having the police force there versus finding it that inconvenient to go to City Hall for City business. If there is a computer available there for the public’s use, staff or Councilmembers, many of whom work remotely, could provide assistance and also do their own work. She volunteered to be there one day a week for four hours. She suggested the Council contemplate, consider and talk about that before locking into a recurring staff salary. Mr. Doherty relayed there has been internal discussion among the directors and staff about how to staff this facility. He agreed this was a temporary, pilot program for a long term commitment. Other cities have similarly dedicated staff such as Seattle’s Neighborhood City Halls in the 1980s, Bellevue’s office at Crossroad’s Mall as well as other communities. Those staff members became known quantities in those communities, where they are known by the people in that area of the city, became very knowledgeable of the issues arising in that area, people are confident the person can help them because they understand the issues, etc. It is a specific type of job. For example, when the public comes into City Hall and interacts with Gayle Johnson at the front counter, she is very knowledgeable about where things are in City Hall, how to get there, who to call, how to get online, etc. When people rotate into a position, they come from different departments, different full-time jobs and basically “keep the seat warm” and probably don’t have Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 13 that broad spectrum knowledge of the questions the public asks. The goal is to cultivate a person who becomes that resource in that space. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said her problem with Councilmembers staffing this office is Councilmembers are not City staff and do not have a full understanding of issues in Highway 99 area or what services the City provides. She was also concerned with having “the police officer chained to a desk there to answer questions and to talk about resource issues in the corridor.” The point of bringing the community liaison into this office is for them to be out in the community, get to know the neighborhoods, stores and what’s going on in the corridor, something they certainly can’t do from an office. If there isn’t a part-time person, the office will be empty most of the time which is definitely not the intent and $30,000/year is pretty inexpensive for a part-time staff. She encouraged Council to support the proposal as presented and if it appears not to be working out, it can be changed next year. She reiterated this was only $30,000 for this staff member when the City was paying the arborist who deals with trees over $100,000/year. This person will actually be able to bring neighborhoods and citizens together and answer questions. Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mr. Doherty for all his work on this, recalling this has been a long- standing area of need for the community. Many Councilmembers have expressed their support for investment in Highway 99 and other areas of the City; this is actually putting that into action and putting money where residents need it. He was especially appreciative of identifying a somewhat more permanent location for community court, stability that is absolutely vital for the community. Recognizing that the administration has been much more forthcoming in engaging the public, sending mailers and letting people know what resources are available, he recommended an extensive public engagement campaign so people know about this new resource in their neighborhood. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Doherty for the complete packet and for his work on this, noting a lot of citizens were surprised that this would be a satellite city hall versus a police department substation although she recognized there will be two police officers in this office. Mr. Doherty clarified the community engagement officer’s principal office will be in this facility. There will be space for two police officers to come into work stations whenever they are in the area, want to take a break, do paperwork, meet with a member of the public, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis said even though they aren’t assigned, technically there might be a police officer there are at all times during the day. Mr. Doherty clarified not all the time, but many times. The public can also make appointments to meet with a police officer in that location. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled when doorbelling, one of the big issues was having a satellite police station. This is a great way to engage the area and she agreed with having a dedicated part-time staff person. She asked what $26,180 Owner TI allowance was. Mr. Doherty answered the owner of the shopping center is allowing the City up to $26,180 to help with tenant improvements up front. He estimated the tenant improvements would be about $43,000 so the owner’s contribution defrays most of that cost. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the $43,000 included sufficient security, internet security, and all the security needs. Mr. Doherty answered it includes security, IT, sound proofing, adding doors for security, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if citizens could feel safe that anything they send there will be like taking it to city hall where it is stamped and protected. Mr. Doherty answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed a question she was asked regarding why the court’s contribution was only $10,000. Mr. Doherty said the court’s contribution is up to $10,000; the court has a small amount from a grant for equipment and furnishings related to community court. If the court is able to get more grant money in the future, that will be encouraged. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding the court would not be charged to use the facility such as interfund rental charge; the $10,000 represents Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 14 equipment the court needs such as bigger screen, etc. Mr. Doherty answered the lion’s share of what needs to be done in the space is due to the court. The court will only use the space 2-4 days/month. Council President Paine thanked Mr. Doherty for getting this put together. She noted this did not come up often in the public because it was related to real estate and if it did, it could impact the cost. She asked if this would be a 24-hour facility or would there be opening/closing hours. Mr. Doherty answered this is the soft introduction, it could change over time and is considered a somewhat temporary location before a permanent space is identified which would require more investment. The initial proposal is 4 hours/day open front lobby space. The community engagement officer’s primary office will be in that location and she will be coming/going throughout an eight hour day. The police officers, likely entering from the rear, will use the work stations to decamp, complete paperwork, take a break and potentially schedule appointments to meet with people. It will be available whenever the community engagement officer or other police officers wish to engage the public there, but the general open door public time would be four hours/day. Council President Paine asked if the public could drop off utility bills, make payments, etc. Mr. Doherty answered that will be explored as it raises questions about cash control, having a box where money is received, additional security requirements, etc. Council President Paine said she was familiar with little city halls in Seattle where practically everything could be done such as payments, etc. She supported having that available to the public as a convenience to people when they were grocery shopping, etc. She was eager to see this facility open, have resources available for people in that area, including resources in different languages. She recognized this was a longtime coming, recalling prior Councilmembers were interested in having a facility on the Highway 99 corridor. She liked the proposal, including the three year trial period. Councilmember L. Johnson said combined with the community engagement officer position, this is an excellent move toward great access and community engagement. She said when she lived in Bellevue, the little city hall at Crossroads Mall was her choice. There were also times when she was at Crossroads Mall for other things and visited the office and learned something or had a question answered. She was excited to bring this to Edmonds citizens and was very supportive of the location. Councilmember K. Johnson said everyone seems very supportive of this idea, but she does not like the way this was presented. Obviously, this was Mayor Nelson’s idea which is fine, but he should have brought the concept to the City Council for discussion before looking for leases. The Council had a presentation a couple weeks ago on this lease option indicating the City was ready to sign and all the Council had to do was agree and it could be put on the Consent Agenda, but that is not the way the Council should be conducting business. This looks like a solution in search of a problem. She questioned spending all this money to have the office open four hours a day and said it did not make sense. The community court has a location and doesn’t need this. Councilmember K. Johnson was very interested in the concept of a satellite police office in that area because it is crime central afterhours in Edmonds. However there is not a secure area for police to process people they arrest. She was very disappointed that the community was told about this in announcement by Mayor Nelson and that there has been no discussion with Council. The proposal now is to approve this at the 11th hour when the Mayor is about to sign the lease which is not the way Council should conduct business. The community has not been involved, the facility has been named without consulting the community, this is a bad public process and will be a waste of public funds. She initially thought it would be a satellite police station, but this accomplishes very little. The Council does not even know what it wants to accomplish but wants to get it started so there can be a soft opening and figure it out later, not the way to spend City money. She did not support this and felt it was a terrible proposal. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 15 Councilmember Olson said she did not disagree with everything Councilmember K. Johnson said but thought it was a good proposal and flexible enough to allow the details to be solidified. With regard to the four hours the facility was open, she recommended a public process to learn what four hours would be most helpful to the community. Mr. Doherty agreed. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported there is no longer space for community court at the hospital. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO APPROVE THE LEASE TERMS, AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND DIRECT STAFF TO INCLUDE THE EXPENDITURES AS A LINE ITEM IN THE 2022 BUDGET. As a member of the community along the corridor, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas appreciated moving forward on this. She recalled the focus during the recent election on Highway 99 and how candidates would support it, comments that have been made repeatedly in the past. This is a great first step; the highest crime rate in the city is the south end. Providing access for police to write reports, take a break or meet with people is a great idea and beginning with four hours/day is reasonable and staff can propose extending it in the future if desired. Councilmember Buckshnis asked what would be cut in the budget to fund this, noting $2.2 million in reserves is already being used which is against the fund balance policy. She recalled when funds were set aside for the marsh in the past, means within the budget had to be identified. This is obviously a new budget item and she wanted to know how it would be funded. She will approve everything except the budget allocation until she understood that aspect. Mr. Doherty answered the motion is to direct staff to include it in the budget process so the Council is not actually approving it via the motion, only to put it in the budget process which includes her information request. Councilmember Olson pointed out for the public, as Council President Paine mentioned this earlier, the Council discusses real estate matters in closed session (executive session) because it can influence the price. This isn’t the first time this has come to Council; it is not the Council’s policy to vote on items the first time they are presented. She asked Councilmember Fraley-Monillas if she would be willing to have the approval go on next week’s Consent Agenda as this is the first time the public has heard about it. It could be removed from the Consent Agenda if something from the public arose this week that needed further discussion. She asked Councilmember Fraley-Monillas if she would accept that as a friendly amendment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas wanted to hear how that would affect the Administration and the contract for the space. Mr. Doherty said he was unable to represent the other party’s position on that. He knew they were interested in hearing from the City as soon as possible; action tonight would achieve that. He could not say for certain that a week’s delay would undo the deal, but it does draw it out more. He would be more comfortable if the Council could approve the motion tonight so the lease could be prepared for signature sometime in the next month. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed concern a delay could blow the deal. She asked when this was presented to the public, whether it was at another Council meeting. Mr. Doherty said the lease terms were shared with Council in executive session and Council gave a green light to proceed with negotiations which resulted in the lower rate. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how citizens were informed, noting she had received emails from citizens about it. Mr. Doherty explained there was a media release on Friday that this would be presented to Council. Councilmember Olson said with so many businesses working remotely, it is likely one week will not blow up a deal and the owner seemed excited to have the City’s office there. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 16 Councilmember K. Johnson asked why this wasn’t a decision package. Mr. Doherty responding finding a location has been an ongoing process and each opportunity would be wildly different in the cost, terms, etc. He was creating decision packages in July/early August and did not have any specifics then so a decision package would have been illusionary. Councilmember K. Johnson said staff has been looking for space but hasn’t brought it to the community or to council. As public notice was only provided last Friday, she objected to the way this had been packaged and felt like it was rushed. Staff has a lease and an idea, but it will only be staffed for four hours. She again asked why it was not included as a decision package for consideration in the 2022 budget. Mr. Doherty said he developed decision packages months ago and this opportunity only came up within the last month and required further exploration. This is a temporary space; the future permanent space that is hoped for would have more community resources, maybe a partnership with other governments in a public private development scenario. The permanent space would include a huge amount of public involvement. Councilmember K. Johnson said she has heard that, but she objected to the rush for a temporary space when it is unknown how it will be used and said she did not think any explanation would satisfy her. Councilmember L. Johnson recalled discussion in executive session as well as discussion in a public meeting last week. Mr. Doherty said there has been casual mention in passing by the Council and the public over the last couple months of the notion of a neighborhood city office or little city hall, but there were no specifics until the press release went out and this evening’s discussion. Councilmember L. Johnson referred to an earlier comment regarding paying for this, $2.2 million from reserves which is against the fund balance policy. Mr. Turley said he planned to address that as soon as the motion was voted on. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she received multiple comments from citizens who live along the corridor who look forward to having this sort of care for that part of the City. The cost is $130,000 and she offered to cut the arborist to pay for it. She commented there were a lot of things that could be done; this is to benefit a large section of the City. She has seen repeated pushback this year regarding anything suggested by the Mayor which she felt was inappropriate and wrong. Just as Councilmember K. Johnson said she won’t support this until she has more information, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the people who live along that corridor deserve better than what they’re getting from this Council. She will not accept putting it on the Consent Agenda next week as a friendly amendment and wanted to approve it tonight because she was tired of the clamoring about spending, summarizing this was nothing in the way of money, $30,000/year for a staff person. Residents in the Highway 99 corridor deserve better than they are getting from some of the Councilmember which is just a lot of talk, and she supported moving it forward, saying “we’ll be fine and we’ll find the money.” Council President Paine expressed support for Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ comments, advising that from a policy direction/policy discussion, this is entirely what the Council aimed to do. The City is investing a lot of money in Highway 99 on road improvements to enliven the public place, there are new apartment developments and this is exactly what the City needs to be doing, provide people in that area a local resource. The proposal is a three year trial; if the City can find space for a police annex, that would be appropriate for a broader policy discussion, but this is the right thing to do to provide a little city hall. She fully supported the motion as it is a proper first step and is not a big commitment. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested everyone calm down, the request was just for an additional week. Citizens were just made aware of this proposal Friday and she did not see why the Council could not wait a week. Everyone on Council except one Councilmember is in full support because the process has been pushed through just like other things such as the budget. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 17 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO MOVE THIS TO NEXT WEEK’S CONSENT AGENDA. Councilmember Buckshnis said she has received 2-3 emails during the meeting; citizens believe in having an office on Highway 99 but some are concerned about the cost of the lease and the cost of the rent. Delaying a week would also allow citizens to email Councilmembers and the item could be pulled from the Consent Agenda if necessary. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said there are staff whose job is to look at this and Mr. Doherty has provided the necessary information. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION. UPON ROLL CALL, VOTE TO CALL THE QUESTION CARRIED (7-0), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas made a point of privilege, apologizing for eating dinner, explaining she was on the east coast and skipped dinner at another meeting to attend this meeting and ordered room service. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. 2. PUBLIC HEARING AND DELIBERATIONS ON THE 2022 BUDGET Councilmember Buckshnis relayed a citizen’s inquiry, whether the special meeting was noticed to end at 8:30 p.m. City Clerk Scott Passey said special meetings are not necessarily noticed with an end time; an estimated time is provided for each agenda item so the end time could be extrapolated from those estimated times. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the last special meeting had to end at a certain time and was extended for 10 minutes. Mr. Passey said that agenda had end time, but this meeting did not. Regular Council meetings have an end time of 10 p.m. but he did not know that that applied to special meetings. Administrative Services Director Dave Turley relayed tonight is another public hearing and Q&A on proposed decision packages. He has posted all the questions received on the Administrative Services website; if any questions were missed, it was an oversight. He has not received many proposed amendments to the budget, recalling the goal was to have those submitted by today so there would be time for Councilmembers to review them prior to next week’s meeting. He hoped to begin receiving proposed amendments soon. Following his presentation. Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty will provide an update on the Business Improvement District (BID) budget. As he has received a lot of questions about how the Fund Balances and Reserved Fund Balances are structured, he provided the following, noting it is important to understand this because it is not just semantics, it is the difference between Available Fund Balance, Fund Balance Reserves, and Contingency Fund Reserves: • Available Fund Balance, Fund Balance Reserves, and Contingency Fund Reserves per September Monthly Report. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 18 o Total Fund Balance in General Fund: $12.8 million ▪ Excess (Unreserved Fund Balance): $5,556,379 ▪ General Fund, Fund 001: $7,267,031 o Contingency Fund 012: $1,768,863 o Reserved (Committed) Fund Balance + Contingency Fund 012 = 16% and 4% in the Fund Balance Policy o $7.2 million of Committed Fund Balance, plus $5.6 million of Unreserved Fund Balance, make up the $12.8 million of Total G.F. Fund Balance, as reported in the 9/30 Monthly Report Mr. Turley explained there is approximately $5,556,000 in unreserved fund balance. The funds needed for the uptown office space or the entire budget being discussed tonight do not begin to touch the reserved/committed fund balance. The Fund Balance Policy states any use of the committed general fund operating reserves shall only be used in cases of fiscal emergency. The committed General Fund Operating Reserve may also be used for one-time, non-recurrent expenditures. He assured there was nothing proposed that even came close to violating the fund policy. In response to a question whether Article 5 of the Fund Balance Policy had been violated by not reviewing this, he explained the Fund Balance Policy says the fund balances for all funds need to be presented to Council in fall. This information is included in every monthly report so no articles of the Fund Balance Policy have been violated. Granted there has not been a lengthy presentation at fully Council to discuss fund balance which could be done, but the information is presented every month. Mr. Turley explained the information regarding the BID’s 2022 budget and work plan was being presented prior to the public hearing to allow the public to comment. Mr. Doherty presented the Edmonds Downtown Alliance 2022 Budget and Work Plan • Background o As required by Edmonds City Code Chapter 3.75 each year no later than October 31st the member advisory board of the Edmonds Downtown Alliance (aka Ed! or Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District) must submit its proposed annual work program and budget for the following year o The Ed! Board submitted its 2022 Work Plan ad Budget to the City on 10/25/21. • Summary of Work Plan A. Administration (Per Ordinance 3909, Item F) i. Program Management ii. Operating Expenses iii. Assessment and Evaluation B. Marketing/Advertising (Per Ordinance 3909, Item A) i. Advertising ii. Website Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating this was new information. A citizen just sent her the extended agenda that states the meeting ends at 8:30 p.m. and this is a new item that should be added to the agenda as it is not part of the decision packages. She did not believe the Council was following the special Council meeting rules by adding this item to the agenda. City Attorney Taraday said he would like to look at the code regarding the BID, but recalled from years prior that this was part of the budget deliberations and the BID’s budget is adopted as part of the City’s budget. Councilmember Buckshnis did not disagree, stating it was generally a presentation handled by the BID before budget deliberations occur where the BID makes an annual presentation to the Council. She questioned having the BID presentation at the special Council meeting. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 19 Mr. Taraday said he understood Councilmember Buckshnis’ point but was not prepared to speak to it because he had not memorized the BID code. Mr. Doherty said the code regarding the BID states they are required to submit a written report that includes their work plan and budget. The yearly presentations, typically about 30 minutes with Q&A, are not required by code, but was felt to be something important to do when the scheduled allowed. This year the schedule has been very busy so it made sense to do a summary. The BID budget and work plan was provided to Council and is included in the budget document. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not see that as an agenda item. Mr. Doherty clarified it is not a separate agenda item, it is part of the overall budget. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if it was appropriate for a Councilmember to be communicating with citizens during the meeting via text or email. Mr. Taraday said he was not aware of any law against it against it unless it is happening in executive session. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded from his answer that it would be okay for Councilmembers to tweet or contact citizens during the meeting, ask citizens to call in, etc. Mr. Taraday reiterated he was not aware of any law that prevents Councilmembers from communicating with their constituents during a Council meeting unless it’s in executive session. Councilmember Olson assumed what Councilmember Buckshnis was getting at was whether or not the Council will be in trouble with OPMA based on having something presented during the meeting that was not included in the agenda. She asked if this was considered budget deliberation or a presentation of the BID budget. The BID budget is not on the agenda which is the point a citizen is making via Councilmember Buckshnis. Mr. Doherty said the BID budget and work plan are part of the overall City budget and have been every year. He was highlighting that portion before the public hearing so the public can make comment if they wish. Mr. Taraday said if the Council wanted him to state an opinion on that he would need a few minutes; he cannot pay attention to everything the Council is saying and do legal research at the same time. Mayor Nelson suggested opening the public hearing to give Mr. Taraday time for research. Councilmember L. Johnson said the top of every extended agenda states, the extended agenda is a planning tool and subject to frequent change. COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO CANCEL THE PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT FOR THE 2022 BUDGET AND TO RESCHEDULE IT AFTER PROPER NOTIFICATION IS CARRIED OUT. Councilmember K. Johnson observed there have been comments tonight from several citizens who determined notices on the front door of city hall conflicted with notice for this meeting and there was some question about the date of the notice and the fact that it wasn’t signed. In order to properly notify the public, whom the Council is asking to provide public comment, they also need copies of the adopted minutes that detail the Council’s comments. She concluded this whole thing is premature and out of order. Council President Paine offered a counter motion: COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AT THE CONCLUSION, CONTINUE IT TO NOVEMBER 16TH TO REMEDY ANY MISCOMMUNICATION WITH THE NOTICE ON THE FRONT DOOR. Councilmember K. Johnson said she was not aware of a counter motion and asked if this was an amendment. Council President Paine clarified it was an amendment. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 20 Councilmember Olson said she asked this question of Mr. Taraday earlier today due to her concern that notices were different in different places. His guidance was the continuation of the public hearing would be a way to avoid a legal problem. Either of these would be adequate remedies but she was game to get the process started today. Mayor Nelson asked Mr. Taraday to speak to the assertion of violations or legal problems. Mr. Taraday answered RCW 35A.33.060dictates the notice that is required to be provided for a budget hearing. That statue requires that the hearing notice be published in the City’s official newspaper. The City published the required budget hearing notice in its official newspaper. The hearing notice was published one time before it was revised and then published as required for the current hearing date. It would be a problem is the Council approved Councilmember K. Johnson’s motion to cancel tonight’s public hearing because the only actual legal notice provided that meets the statutory requires of RCW 35A.33.060 requires the hearing be conducted tonight. The public hearing definitely needs to be conducted tonight; his recommendation is the Council continue the hearing and allow anyone unable to be present for the hearing tonight to provide public testimony on the budget next week. That way if there was any actual confusion due to the posting issue, the public would have an opportunity to speak. He noted posting is not required for budget notices, only publication is required. COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember K. Johnson explained she withdrew her motion based on Mr. Taraday’s advice but reiterated if the Council expects public involvement, they need to see the minutes. Not withstanding the Council’s regular minute taker’s medical issues, she said there are other people that take minutes for the City including for the Planning Board and staff could ask if they are available in order to have the minutes available for any continued public hearing. Council President Paine said she also raised the question to Mr. Taraday when she first became aware of it. She suggested taking a vote to add that to next week’s agenda. Councilmember Olson pointed out the amendment did not stand without the main motion so a new motion was required. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO NOVEMBER 16, 2021. Councilmember Buckshnis said it was brought to her attention this week that the publication that was posted indicated November 23rd as a public hearing. Mr. Taraday answered his understanding of the facts are that there has never been a notice that indicated there would be a budget hearing on November 23rd. If that was incorrect, he encouraged someone to bring that to his attention. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if he meant published or posted. Mr. Taraday responded either. Councilmember Buckshnis said it was her understanding people have pictures. Mr. Taraday said if someone has facts that differ from the facts he has, they should bring them forward because his advice can only be as good as the facts he has. Council President Paine pointed out extending the public hearing would be a third opportunity for the public to comment on the budget. COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO BE CONTINGENT UPON RECEIVING THE RECORDS OF THE DISCUSSION AT THE CITY COUNCIL AVAILABLE. THIS WILL BE THREE MEETINGS OF WHICH WRITTEN RECORDS ARE NEEDED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 21 Councilmember L. Johnson asked if the Council could make a motion like that. Mr. Taraday said he was unsure he understood the effect of the motion. He understood there was a request that minutes be generated but he was not sure what the effect of the motion would be. He suggested the Councilmember clarify. Councilmember K. Johnson said her motion included contingent so the public hearing would need to be continued again. She did not want to have a public hearing scheduled when none of the minutes are available and may not be available. There have been three discussions, October 26th, November 4th and tonight. It is supposed to be a public hearing, but she questioned how the public could comment if the minutes were not provided to the public in advance, noting that seemed to be somewhat of an oxymoron to her. She was uncertain how to make the motion so that the public hearing was contingent on having that information available but that was her desire. Mr. Taraday said this is a matter left to the Council’s discretion. The statute regarding budget hearing notices does not require that minutes be prepared of the previous budget discussions; that is not part of RCW 35A.33.060, the statutory notice requirement for the hearing. If the Council chooses to, it can continue the budget hearing for as many meetings as it would like. Councilmember K. Johnson said the Council needs to have these minutes and needs to direct the administration and Mr. Passey to look at alternative methods for making the minutes available. She understood that the regular minute taker was having medical issues but she is not the only one that can create minutes. Councilmember L. Johnson said while she agreed it would be helpful to have the minutes as soon as possible, Councilmembers just argued that the public hearing on November 16th needed to be continued as had been previously noticed, now there is an amendment to possibly not continue. It was suggested the way to remedy this was to continue the hearing to November 16th so she will support the motion to continue the public hearing to November 16th. Councilmember K. Johnson said the continuance does not have to be to November 16th; it could be some other time. Councilmember Distelhorst pointed out the Council is supposed to be having a public hearing right now to hear from the public and provide opportunity for the public to speak and instead there are a lot of comments from Council not in support of the motion. There are videos of Council meetings available as well as all the Q&A produced by Mr. Turley that largely cover what has been discussed at Council meetings. He did support this amendment and looked forward to opening the public hearing. Councilmember Buckshnis said it is the citizens who are complaining and do not want to watch seven hours of Council meetings and would rather read the minutes and then listen to the meeting if necessary. This public hearing on the budget is for citizens to provide Council input on the budget and the process. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested, getting on with the public hearing. Councilmember K. Johnson restated the amendment: MAKE THE CONTINUANCE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINGENT ON HAVING THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PREPARED. NOT TO CONTINUE IT TO THE 16TH BUT A PRE- CONDITION FOR HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING IS HAVING THE WRITTEN DOCUMENTS. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT 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. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 22 UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION CARRIED (7-0), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES. Mr. Doherty asked whether the Council wanted him to complete the remaining two minutes of his presentation. Councilmember Buckshnis asked for a ruling on whether this was an agenda item at a special meeting. There is nothing in the packet about the BID budget or work plan. Council President Paine pointed out the budget book addresses special revenue funds, the BID has its own line item as part of budget, therefore, it was appropriate for the Council to discuss the BID and their work plan. Mr. Doherty clarified he was not seeking approval tonight, he was simply sharing the information with the public so they can offer comment on it tonight or next week. Mr. Taraday reiterated he would need a recess of the meeting to look at the code related to the BID because he could not do research while listening to the Council’s discussion. Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing and described the procedures. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said he has heard a lot about how the Council President sets the agenda but believed that was an oversimplification. Earlier today City Clerk Scott Passey said, “when the decision was made to update the budget schedule and hearings, the updated notice was republished in the Everett Herald on October 15th and October 27th per RCW 35W.33.060.” He did not hear any discussion today of who made the decision to update the budget schedule and hearings or how that decision was made. Decisions related to the budget schedule are a big deal. Immediately proceeding RCW 35A.33.060 in the RCW is 35A.33.055, a statute that concludes as follows: prior to the final hearing on the budget, the legislative body or a committee thereof shall schedule hearings on the budget or parts thereof and may require the presence of department heads to give information regarding estimates and programs. He pointed out only the legislative body or a committee thereof shall schedule hearings on the budget thereof. The City Council President is not a legislative body or a committee thereof. He wondered when the legislative body or a committee thereof will schedule hearings on the budget or parts thereof and believed it needed to be done in an open public. He wondered what the significance of last Thursday’s hearing and tonight’s hearing were; neither were scheduled by the legislative body or a committee thereof. This stuff should not be so confusing; he hoped it would be simple to following things like RCW 35A.33.055 and do this right. He urged the Council to respect state law and halt this hearing at once. As committees don’t meet again until the second Tuesday in December, he suggested the best course of action would be to have an item added to the November 16, 2021 agenda so City Council can vote to schedule hearings on the budget or parts thereof. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on expenditures in this year’s budget. She supported the lease for the neighborhood City office, finding that a great first step to increasing the City’s presence and services provided to the SR-99/uptown community. She suggested including language skills in the advertisement for the position and ready access to a language line. The City should also provide translated notices so residents can be served in their language. Access to elected officials is a wonderful idea as a supplement and many would appreciate that. She also supported the REDI Program Manager; to understand why this position was desperately needed, one only needed to look at the dots on the Public Works and Parks Capital Facilities maps to see all the dots in the bowl and then look at the resources and spending in the SR-99 and South Edmonds community where there are higher proportions of non-white citizens or know that this year’s PROS Plan public meetings were the first where the City offered interpretation. The City should begin addressing the equity of spending in this budget cycle. The City can use existing policies with the addition of equity considerations to identify spending priorities for the coming year. The City should not wait until plan updates are complete; doing so would only prolong the impact of previous administrations and Councils that did not consider equity and delay many communities from seeing the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 23 equitable benefits of their tax dollars. She thanked Councilmembers for their service, recognizing and appreciating the tremendous amount of effort they put in. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, said City staff and some backroom dealing have added confusion to this process. When it was discovered on November 7th at 7:18 a.m. that the posting on the city hall front door had the original October 8th hearing schedule and public notice which has been posted throughout all the hearings and deliberations, everyone thought this would be voted on November 23rd. He thanked Councilmember Fraley-Monillas for finally disclosing last week that the reason the adoption date was changed to November 16th was that in her opinion Councilmember Distelhorst is smarter and more knowledgeable than who the voters chose on August 2nd. It wasn’t until after the Snohomish County canvassing board came out and said those results would be final on November 23rd that the Council decided to change the hearing schedule. He also wanted to know how that decision was made; Mr. Taraday says the RCW doesn’t require a posting or public notice but the code says it’s a courtesy, a gratuitous, but that is not how case law is. The Council needs to look at the public notice and make City staff and the Mayor follow state law, delay this process, get the minutes done and keep the public involved. These are taxpayers’ dollars and the Mayor is misspending them. Cheryl Farrish, Edmonds, President of Ed!, thanked Mr. Doherty for putting together a presentation even if it the full presentation was not provided. The Council should have received copies of Ed!’s budget and work plan and she and Program Manager Carrie Hulbert have also met with several Councilmembers and the Mayor to discuss their work and continue dialogue improving the city everyone loves. Ed! is funded by assessments from businesses located in the downtown Edmonds core. It was founded in 2013 and tonight the Council will be reviewing is Ed!’s eighth year work plan. Ed!’s mission is to ensure that downtown stays lively, attractive, prosperous and welcoming to everyone. Ed! has consistently met these goals with a robust marketing plan, interactive social media presence, and cohesive visual marketing and seasonal campaigns that help make Edmonds an attractive day trip destination. This year the Council probably saw their summer loving campaign decals around town with a shop local focus, their continued work on afterhours parking and signage, and the signature umbrellas that are making a comeback after many stayed indoors during the height of COVID. Ms. Farrish continued, this winter, Ed! will bring back the Edmonds holiday campaign which includes running the trolley in coordination with the City; thanks to ARPA funds and Mr. Doherty for assisting with that. Emily the elf is also making a comeback as well as holiday drink bingo, a new ornament stroll and holiday gift bags, among others. The holiday campaign in particular are popular with Edmonds residents and businesses alike and have led to a lot of engagement with visitors. All this has been done in 2021 despite a slight downturn in assessments due to COVID. Ed! scaled back it’s 2021 budget and were fiscally conservative, allowing them to end 2021 with a very healthy 30% end of the year project fund budget. Ed! successes and organization can be credited to many including Ms. Hulbert who is Ed!’s only paid staff and brings a wealth of experience and energy as well as great allies in the City. Ed!’s initiatives are driven by hundreds of volunteer hours from local business members which speaks to the strength of the small town that there are members willing to pour from their already full cups to fill umbrellas buckets, hang holiday decals and execute season campaigns. She respectfully requested approval of their 2022 budget. Highlights include projected available funds of $102,000 as well as expenses of $87,680, putting the projected yearend fund balance at the end of 2022 at $14,680. Ed!’s next meeting is next Thursday at 8 a.m. and Councilmembers are welcome to attend. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said it was evident that the Council was struggling with the budget process. The timeframe to approve the budget process has been accelerated considerably over previous years, giving citizens less time for input and for thoughtful deliberation by Councilmembers. With the proposed deficit spending budget, he contended more time, not less time, was needed to digest and understand it. For whatever reason and motivation, Council President Paine changed the previously posted decision Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 24 dates, which were already aggressive, to earlier dates which further compress the schedule. Now there is a disconnected schedule destined to produce a budget that will not meet the City’s needs. This is self- inflicted, did not need to be this way and demonstrates a lack of leadership. He expected a robust discussion tonight on how the Council intended to pay for this proposed budget deficit, how much of the reserves would be used, and what percentage of the reserves it represents. If the Council intended to balance the budget, he asked what priorities would be used. Without a process it will be an ad hoc approach with little to show for it. The Council has heard numerous ideas on how citizens would prioritize projects and he hoped the Council was listening. He appreciated Student Representative Roberts sitting through these meetings and was sure he was learning a lot but hoped he was not becoming disillusioned by all of it because he represents the future. Carolyn Strong, Edmonds, echoed Ken Reidy’s comments that this meeting should have been canceled because notice was not properly given. It was apparent from watching tonight’s meeting which electeds are representing the people of Edmonds and which have an agenda to push past the people without their input, without their knowledge, and without due process. It is shameful Councilmembers are trying to push through the budget without proper procedure for no real reason. The Council is trying to approve the budget ahead of schedule in past years for no other reason because they want to do so with Councilmember Distelhorst on the Council; citizens know that and the Council knows it. That is not what the Council is in office to do; they are supposed to represent the taxpayers of Edmonds and the Council is spending their money. This is not transparent or accountable government; it is a few members pushing past the people, not giving due respect to those they represent, a poor example of how a Council should operate. She appreciated some members, stating Councilmembers K. Johnson, Buckshnis and Olson represent the people and she appreciated all they did to have the citizens’ voices hears. All she hears from Councilmembers L. Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Distelhorst and Council President Paine is screw the people, this is what we want to do and we’re going to do it, but that is not how government is supposed to work. Councilmembers represent and work for the citizens and need a refresher course in civics. She found the shenanigans overwhelming and asked how some Councilmembers looked themselves in the mirror when they pulled this on the people they were supposed to be representing; she found it very shameful. Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, said the police station is a good idea, however, she agreed with Councilmember K. Johnson in part that the proposed location, although it may be a good deal, is dangerous due to the huge grocery store and other stores. She was concerned that having a police station there would endanger the public going to those stores. She suggested finding a different location that was closer to Edmonds than Shoreline and it should include 3-4 cells. The police are engaged, good people and will be nice to everyone. She knew about people freaking out on drugs as she was an outreach worker for 14 years with homeless youth. She did not want people to think that because of the Zoom that she just found about today, she is blocked from that site for no reason, and has copies of the messages showing what those gals were saying to her. Rebecca Anderson, Edmonds, said continued engagement in the local government is imperative if citizens desire to keep Edmonds a vibrant and functioning community. She has learned a tremendous amount about the local government and realized how important it is to participate beyond voting every four years. Regarding decision package 16, a request to increase the current public information officer strategist position from .5 to 1.0 FTE, she asked if this was really necessary, what problem is the City trying to solve, will simply spending more money do that and where is the proof the current PIO is overworked? She was concerned with the need to increase this position when the City’s previous .5 PIO quit, a seasoned professional who had worked in many municipalities. According to an article in MEN, she didn’t quit because she was overworked but because she was not being utilized by the administration and keeping the public update on important City issues like the chief of police hiring. It would be prudent for the public to know how this staffing need sequences with other positions in the administration. The Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 25 previous administration, before Mayor Nelson, used a .4 consultant. The current PIO’s recent use of Facebook as the sole way to inform the public and the local press about the Mayor’s budget address, an extremely important topic to residents, led her to believe that perhaps the person in the position is not a good fit. Being a PIO is a pretty boilerplate position and can be done efficiently if the right person is in the position without increasing costs to taxpayers. George Bennett, Edmonds, said as Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out, Candace Clyborne is his wife and she is the daughter of Ron Clyborne. He was grateful the election cycle was over because we need to get back to the City’s business. A majority of Council, even those he disagrees with, have stuck to the City’s business. He was glad to see one Councilmember whose decorum and treatment of citizens has been less that what he called a public official’s duty was leaving and he was happy to discuss that with her over a glass of wine but hopefully not during a Council meeting. He thanked Councilmember Distelhorst, noting his decorum, demeanor, collegiality and the way he stands up for and votes his position has been commendable. He is always well prepared, well-spoken and always responds. He would like to think that all Councilmembers, regardless of their beliefs, could use Luke Distelhorst as a model. He did not vote for Distelhorst because of the way he conducted himself, but if a few other Councilmember would conduct themselves in the same manner, they may sway more votes their way. With regard to the budget cycle, Mr. Bennett said if the City Attorney has to take a recess to give the Mayor and Council direction on the rules, he questioned how a DoorDash driver like him can understand what the Council is trying to do. The Council works for the citizens; if Councilmembers Paine, L. Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Distelhorst are the prognosticators and preachers, he urged them to preach the truth because he did not know what they were doing and was beginning to believe they did not either. He encouraged the businesses on Highway 99 and the Community Development Director to start an Uptown Business Improvement District, an area visited by people outside Edmonds, and put their money where their mouth is to redevelop Highway 99. Beth Fleming, Edmonds, said looking at the screen now, she did not see Councilmembers Distelhorst or Fraley-Monillas and questioned whether they were still listening to citizen comments or perhaps gathering citizen input is not a priority. Last week’s meeting ended at 10 p.m., when Councilmember Buckshnis still had questions and when she expressed concern that the CFP/CIP presentation started at 9:30 and extended until 11 p.m. was extremely late to ask citizens to participate, Councilmember Fraley- Monillas pointed out meetings during the budget season result in late nights, but not that include budget discussion that residents want to hear, only presentation of information but no opportunity for Councilmembers to discuss. Citizens are left reading notes that don’t exist online and asked to live with it. She was shocked that that was a contentious issue tonight, getting comments online for the next public hearing. Ms. Fleming said she was 100% opposed to anything in the budget that increased the size of government because clearly this government cannot function and she was not interested in investing more tax dollars into something dysfunctional. She was not interested in the REDI program manager, the human services department which she has questions about and would love to hear discussion about that because the county and Verdant could share some of the cost of services, what is the RFA’s role in that, do services overlap or is more money just being thrown at it. She did not support the solar panel program, would like to hear more about the City Attorney’s bloated budget, and cut back on vehicle purchases. She supported all the police department requests other than the two 2015 and 2017 cars. She supported having a public hearing next week. Councilmembers Fraley-Monillas and Distelhorst assured they were present. Councilmember Distelhorst said he was on a slightly slow internet connection and turning off his video helped. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 26 Hearing no further comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public participation portion of tonight’s public hearing, advising the public hearing had been continued until the next meeting. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Councilmember Buckshnis said she has been in meetings all day long and she and others are tired. She did not think the Council should be discussing extremely important and intense things at this late hour. She preferred to adjourn the meeting and start fresh next Tuesday. Mr. Passey advised a motion to adjourn is a privileged motion, requires a second and a majority vote, and is not debatable. 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. Council President Paine inquired if Mr. Taraday had researched the earlier request. Mr. Taraday recommended the BID be discussed next week. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of clarification, stating she has received noting from Ed! regarding their budget or work plan. Mr. Taraday said he was making that recommendation out of an abundance of caution as it was not worth any potential controversy. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED TO ADD $20,000 TO THE STREET FUND, FOR STREET REPAIR. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, whether Councilmembers were making motions regarding additions to the budget tonight. It was her understanding tonight was only discussion. Mr. Turley agreed with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, the intent was to collect all the amendments and make all the motions at next week’s meeting. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE WITHDREW THE MOTION. Councilmember Olson referred to DP 16, the half-time PIO that was mentioned during the public hearing. She recalled Mr. Doherty describing her being away from the office and having to finish things the next day, but she was curious about several elements of the position. She asked for examples where having a half-time person was detrimental to the City. She was also curious whether the full-time job would be readvertised to attract someone with experience as a city PIO or does the existing person, whose only municipal experience is the job with Edmonds, become full-time. She also asked for more information about why the additional hours were needed, what hasn’t gotten done, and what harm has been caused. She was looking for areas to reduce spending and this decision package was a possibility for that. Mr. Doherty responded the half-time position is barely enough to do the bare minimum of the job, getting out press releases mostly on time but sometimes late, contributing to social media posts, etc. Although the PIO reports to him, he shouldn’t have to do a lot of the hands-on work to prepare or finalize press releases, checking social media and reviewing comments, responding to comments/questions, etc. but with a half-time position that often happens. It is not an effective use of his position and takes away from higher priority things although communication is a high priority. For example if a press release needs to be sent out but it is not quite finished, he takes it over, incorporates the last comments from a director or Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 27 the mayor and makes sure it gets out. Another example is if something has been on social media and garnering a lot of comments, he will review the comments to see if anything needs to be addressed, a task that a full-time PIO would do. Mr. Doherty continued, more importantly, the other half of that job is communication strategist; that aspect of the job has not been accomplished with part-time hours. This entails meeting with department directors and staff to map out the best public communication and engagement strategies, ensure departments’ efforts are not overlapping, strategize how best to get the word out and how to engage the public. There are things the City has not been able to do; even though it started for a short time, there has not been a monthly news bulletin or blog, or anything to engage the public. With social media, information can be sent out but it cannot be monitored all the time with a half-time position. The press often has a higher expectation of the PIO’s availability and want the ability to contact someone at all times. The position was originally created as a pilot to see if it was needed and it has been determined that it is needed. Edmonds is a full-service city with a lot of issues and it makes sense to have a full-time PIO. Councilmember Olson reiterated her question about qualifications. Mr. Doherty said in speaking with the HR Director, she said the City is not required to readvertise the position unless there are concerns about the person’s performance or ability to take on a full-time job. If the Council approves increasing the hours for the position, the first step will be to discuss with the person whether they are interested expand their hours. The position would only be readvertised if the current staff member was not interested in increased hours or if there were concerns with their performance. Councilmember Olson asked if it was true the person did not have city communications experience besides working for Edmonds. Mr. Doherty answered he did not have her resume memorized but by the end of the year would have over a year’s experience working for the City and she has lots of communication experience in other spheres, not specifically municipal. Councilmember Olson asked if the current staff person had experience in creating communication strategies. Mr. Doherty expressed concern with discussing an individual’s qualifications. Councilmember L. Johnson raised a point of order, expressing concern with discussing an employee’s performance in a public meeting as she did not think that was appropriate. Mayor Nelson ruled point taken and asked Councilmember Olson to rephrase her question. Councilmember Olson said she did not say anything about the person’s performance. Mayor Nelson said she was insinuating. Councilmember Olson said she did not think she was. She was interested in their experience and the job description and what the job description and experience should be for a full-time position. Mr. Doherty said the job description doesn’t change, it would simply be having enough hours to accomplish the job description that was overly ambitious for a half-time position. He anticipated with a full-time position the expectations in the job description could be accomplished. Councilmember L. Johnson commented Councilmembers have received a number of emails and there was a recent letter to the editor framing the issue as sidewalks or bike lanes. She asked staff to speak to funding sources, noting there are two decisions packages, one that references 900 feet of sidewalks versus funding for bike lanes and the recent addition of two bike lane expansions for pedestrian safety. Mr. Williams recalled a discussion with Council committee earlier tonight about a smaller bike lane project. The primary effort related to bike lanes on 9th, 100th & Bowdoin is funded via a Sound Transit grant. The City successfully competed for the grant with a project scope that met Sound Transit’s requirements. The grant is $1.85 million and the local match is approximately $191,000. In addition to bike lanes, that project also includes pedestrian amenities such as upgrading ADA ramps, new crosswalks and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB). Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 28 Mr. Williams continued, there are a variety of ways new sidewalks are built, often it is with redevelopment which requires compliant sidewalks with ramps. The City also has a sidewalk crew that has done several short sidewalk segments as well as ADA ramps, bulb outs, etc. There are also occasional grant opportunities for sidewalks such as Safe Routes to Schools. Staff always tries to take advantage of outside funding sources for sidewalks and pedestrian safety improvements; the goal is to use City dollars last. Councilmember L. Johnson referred to the funding source for the bike lanes, a Sound Transit grant, providing the analogy if she was given a gift certificate to McDonalds by the corporation, she could not tell them she preferred Taco Bell; she would need to say thank you, take her Happy Meals or pass the gift certificate on to the next person. Mr. Williams agreed that was how it worked, an entity applies for a grant, describes the scope of the project that the grant would fund and the granting agency awards the grant. There is usually a match required although not always, and the granting agency expects the work to be done. If costs increase, there is seldom more grant funds provided, the City would need to provide the additional funds. He was unaware of a grant program that would allow the City to accept a grant to build sidewalks and then use it for something else. Councilmember L. Johnson asked the dollar amount Edmonds has prioritized for sidewalks in this budget. Mr. Williams answered the sidewalks crew is about $350,000; 2 people and supplies and equipment spread over numerous small projects. There is also a project on Elm west of 9th to install 700 feet of missing sidewalks costing approximately $900,000. The budget includes $1.5 million for paving in 2022, anytime the pavement touches a curb, adjacent non-compliant sidewalks or curb ramps have to be upgraded. Approximately 30% of the paving budget is concrete work adjacent to the paved street. Councilmember K. Johnson referred to DP 16 recalling the legislative expectations for creating this position, three fabulously bad failures in the City: the tree code, the Housing Task Force and the overpass over the BNSF tracks. For those reasons Council wanted to do a better job with public information. The job was not envisioned as an instrument for the Mayor’s public information announcements, but initially designed as a coordination tool to assist departments in getting the public involved in their projects and programs. This position has morphed into a public information officer instead of a public coordination effort. The legislative intent for decision packages should be included in the description, recalling that recommendation was made by Mike Bailey during the Council’s budget retreat. Councilmember Distelhorst referred to DP 16, commenting it was absolutely correct that a communications role like this can oversee public engagement, an important part of municipal administration including reaching the public in multiple languages throughout the City. It is not a full- time job, it is really two full-time jobs, one for public engagement and one for public information and communication, two separate disciplines in the communication world. Increasing the position to at least full-time is needed to provide proper support for administration; these positions serve the administration, not necessarily the Council. Having 15 years of professional experience working for public agencies as well as the private sector, he knew it could not be accomplished well on a half-time basis so he fully supported DP 16. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the meeting needed to be extended or was a free-for-all since it was a special meeting. Mr. Passey said a motion could be made to fix the time to adjourn. It requires a second, is non-debatable, is amendable and requires a majority to pass. Mr. Taraday relayed there is a code section that requires a 10 p.m. adjournment in the absence of a motion to extend. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO EXTEND TO 10:15 P.M. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 29 Councilmember Buckshnis said she had plenty of questions that needed to be answered and she hoped Councilmembers would be afforded that opportunity in the coming weeks. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Administration would provide examples of decision packages that perhaps could be funded from the ARPA. She referred to DP 71 which identified the funding source as 2021 bond proceeds. She has not received a list of the projects Council approved for bonding and had envisioned that the Council would be part of that decision process, but this decision packages makes it sounds like those decisions have already been made. Mr. Turley answered the bond proceeds that will be used for building maintenance will be deposited this month into Fund 016. The decision packages that identify Fund 016 as a funding source are the projects Mr. Williams has identified to be bond funded in 2022. Councilmember Buckshnis said she thought Council would be part of that decision making and asked whether that went through a Council committee. Mr. Turley answered there was about $900,000 in Fund 016 out of the $4.4 million that will be deposited. Mr. Williams answered approximately $980,000 was listed which included projects in the decision packages. Depending on the pace projects are completed, a budget amendment could be done in 2022 to allocate additional bond funding. Next year will be the first year of the job order contracting (JOC) process that will be more efficient in delivering a number of small projects. The projects to be funded by that $980,000 are listed in the decision package. Councilmember Buckshnis said when Council approved those bonds, they were told they would be part of the decision process to determine what projects would be funded via bond proceeds. She asked if she needed to look through the entire budget to see which projects were funded via Fund 016 or was a list available. Mr. Williams answered the decision packages associated with Fund 016 are listed. Mr. Turley advised the projects are listed on page 165. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled there was more than $980,000 in bonds. Mr. Williams answered there is $4.4 million in bonds, but that cannot be spent in one year. It’s possible more than $980,000 can be spent; the money will be in the fund for the list of project developed in 2018 via the building assessment done by McKinstry plus a couple new projects. The intent is primarily to address the deferred maintenance backlog. Councilmember Buckshnis said she believed Council should have been part of the process to determine priorities using the McKinstry report. She noted there will also be ARPA funds coming that will blow everything up. Councilmember Buckshnis asked where the remaining $3.8 million in bond funds would be stored. Mr. Williams recalled Mr. Turley said it would be deposited into the 016 Fund and further authorization will be sought to spent money out of that fund. The first $980,000 in projects will be accomplished and if there is time to do more work in 2022, staff will request additional funds be appropriated. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding that the funds will be non-interest bearing in Fund 016. Mr. Turley answered all excess funds are invested, whether investment interest accrues to Fund 016 or another fund is another story as not all funds earn interest but all City funds that earn interest go to the City. Councilmember Buckshnis said investment interest on Fund 016 would go to that fund; she offered to check that policy. Council President Paine referred to DP 23, $15,000 for a facilities condition assessment dedicated to updating the Facilities Condition Report which will help prioritize facilities maintenance projects. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to DP 21, noting the narrative does not match Fund 063 or the numbers listed. It was her understanding there was a $415,000 carryforward. Deputy Parks, Recreation, Cultural and Human Services Director Shannon Burley answered when the decision packages were Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 30 developed in July, it was estimated that $415,000 would be unspent and would be carried forward. She agreed there was a slight discrepancy between the narrative at the top and the numbers at the bottom, stating the numbers at the bottom are accurate for the budget. The numbers she submitted for estimated benefits were high and when Finance did a scrub they reduced those numbers which then did not align with the narrative. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the amount that would be carried forward, observing only approximately $85,000 was spent in 2021. Ms. Burley said if she could correct the narrative, the carryforward would be changed to $409,500. Councilmember Buckshnis said the request was for an additional $200,00 plus a $300,000 one-time expense. Ms. Burley clarified the request was for an additional $200,000 this year; of the total $609,000 expenditure authority requested, $300,000 is a one- time expense. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the budget amendment process is extremely important to track the use of funds. 8. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:13 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 31 Public Comment for 11/9/21 Council Meeting: From: Pam Brisse Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 8:10 PM To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Public Comment I just want to share my support for a new satellite community office near 99 and support the creation of a new part-time job to staff the location. I think it sounds like a great idea and hope it’s successful. Please don’t delay. I am also in full support of the REDI Manager position, that seems valuable for our community as awareness of diversity issues becomes more important to all of us. I also don’t feel like the budget is being rushed and have confidence in the current city council to do the right thing for the community and see no need to delay further to get new council members up to speed. Thank you. From: Rebecca Anderson Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 6:50 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Buckshnis, Diane <Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov>; Monillas, Adrienne <Adrienne.Monillas@edmondswa.gov>; Johnson, Laura <Laura.Johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Paine, Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>; Johnson, Kristiana <kristiana.johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Distelhorst, Luke <Luke.Distelhorst@edmondswa.gov>; Vivian Olsen <vivian.olson@comcast.net> Subject: Audience Comments 11/9/2021 I've been told the audio while I was speaking faded in and out. So, to make sure my comments make it into public record, I am sending this email: (Read at 11/09/2021 Edmonds City Council Meeting) Can you hear me now? Thank you. My name is Rebecca Anderson and I am grateful to be a resident of Edmonds. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 32 Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. And thank you to those residents who are listening. I look forward to the time when we are able to return to holding in-person public city meetings. Being together in person removes barriers and strengthens relationships. This is something our community could use right now – strengthening relationships and improving communications. Also, I am grateful to live in this country. Unfortunately we are currently experiencing a trend where if you say something, anything that upsets someone else, instead of being given an opportunity to explain yourself in a civil manner, you are at risk of being canceled. Does anyone want to revisit what happened in Edmonds when someone decorated a treat with three words? Anyone want a Build the Wall cookie? (pause) And so, instead of taking to social media as the person did who disliked a sugar cookie in 2019, I will now read into public record a recent letter to the editor regarding a retweet by our council president Susan Paine. “Letter to the editor: Council president’s code of conduct” Posted: November 9, 2021 104 Editor: On 10/29/21 (three days prior to the election), Susan Paine, Edmonds City Council president, retweeted trash talk about three candidates running for City Council. The original tweet came from someone who goes by Edmonds Eats. Since My Edmonds News letters to the editor cannot show visuals, here is what she retweeted publicly through Twitter: “Know what’d be REALLY scary? Sleazeball Neil Tibbot, fake Janelle Cass, and unwell Kristiana Johnson making decisions about Edmonds the next 4 years. They’ve deliberately lied and skirted laws while trying to get our votes. Imagine what they’d do if they don’t need them.” Is this how a city council president should behave? Doesn’t this go against the Code of Conduct Susan is presiding over? She should be removed from overseeing the rewriting of our City Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics as she clearly does not follow them. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 33 As an Edmonds citizen, you should be extremely disappointed in Susan Paine. Shame on her for sharing this damaging tweet about candidates running. She needs to apologize to all involved. Myself, along with many other concerned Edmonds residents, hope this poor lack of judgment is made public. I believe it is the only way for Susan to stop these type of damaging actions, especially as council president. We deserve so much better from our elected leaders. Kim Bayer-Augustavo Edmonds (https://myedmondsnews.com/2021/11/letter-to-the-editor-council-presidents-code-of- conduct/) And so, I am here as an Edmonds resident asking our council president to explain why she retweeted the tweet she did on October 29. Does she stand by the tweet? Is that how she believes a sitting council member should conduct themselves in public? Thank you. From: michelle dotsch Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 4:41 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com> Subject: October 26th, 2021 and November 1, 2021 City Council Meetings have no public posting of even draft minutes on the City website or in tonight's Packet to review for tonight's public hearing To Edmonds City Council, Council president Susan Paine and City Attorney Taraday, I am attempting to prepare for this "special" meeting tonight that includes a public hearing for the City of Edmonds 2022 Budget, of which I do not believe has been accurately, timely and equitably noticed by the City to all of the public in all available ways, so it should not be taking place. I am also unable to competently prepare comments for the public hearing on the budget tonight, as there are no notes available to review from the City Council Regular Meeting of October 26, 2021 and City Council Special Meeting of November 1, 2021, where city business related to this public hearing on the 2022 City Budget took place. They are both not included in today's November 9, 2021 agenda packet, nor found anywhere on the City website to review if some of the public, like myself, could not attend live to hear the meetings and take notes, or stay up for the full 3-4 hours for each of them. I do not have the over 7 hours of time before this meeting tonight, having only the single available option to have to watch both of the entire videos Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 34 without written minutes available to me, trying to figure out when in the video and what was presented and said without any reference, when I should be able to quickly scan the meeting minutes, whether approved or in draft form. Neither is available to me at 4:11 pm today on Tuesday, November 9, shown on the screenshot included with time stamp, the same day as I am expected to competently participate in only one of 2 public hearing opportunities regarding adoption of the 2022 City of Edmonds Budget? This is unacceptable. This demonstrates even further that these are clearly unprepared, rushed "special meetings" with no purpose other than an artificial deadline that shuts out equitable participation from the public - at their own "public hearing"! Please cancel this public hearing tonight on the 2022 budget and properly notice and provide all forms of documentation necessary ahead of time as needed for the public to properly participate at a public hearing as critical as our 2022 City Budget, which will decide how the public's tax dollars will be spent. Michelle Dotsch Edmonds Resident From: finis tupper Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 7:15 AM To: Passey, Scott <Scott.Passey@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Posted Public Hearing Notice 2022 Budget Dear City Clerk Passey: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 35 1.) First, the City Council or a Council Committee shall deliberate and approve a public hearing schedule in an open public meeting. RCW 35A.33.055 2.) Immediately following the filing of the Mayor’s preliminary final budget with the city clerk, the city clerk shall publish Public Hearing Notice in the official newspaper Everett Herald once a week for two consecutive weeks. RCW 35A.33.060 & ECC 1.03.030 3.) Edmonds City Code requires posting of the Public Hearing Notice in three places Edmonds Public Safety Complex, Edmonds City Hall and Edmonds Public Library ECC 1.03.020 (A)(B)(C) On Sunday, November 7th, 2021 at 7:18 AM posted on the front door of Edmonds City Hall located at 250 Fifth Ave, Edmonds WA 98020 was the Public Hearing Notice signed by you October 8th, 2021. The schedule as outlined included: Tuesday, November 23rd, 2021- Council Deliberations and Adoption of 2022 City Budget and Tuesday, December 7th, 2021- Adoption (if necessary). Sometime on November 8th, 2021, a new unsigned Public Hearing Notice was posted on the City Hall front door. The new Public Hearing Notice does not include the November 23rd, 2021 and December 7th, 2021 Council agenda items. Also the notice incorrectly states that it was posted on October 15th, 2021. The posting of this new Public Hearing Notice creates an injury to a public record and therefore your conduct is malfeasance of your duty as a public official. Today, I request that a properly signed with a corrected posting date of the Public Hearing Notice for 2022 City Budget be done and posted as required by City Code and State law. Please email me a copy with your corrections. Yours truly, Finis Tupper Edmonds WA 98020 From: cdfarmen Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 4:08 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Sidewalks vs Bike lanes To all council members, Before you decide to provide funding for additional bike lanes, I think it is appropriate and reasonable to do a study on bike traffic, much the same as is done for vehicular traffic. There needs to be solid data that would support more bike lanes before you arbitrarily allocate a single penny for additional bike lanes. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 36 And, lastly, keep personal desires out of the equation in making your decision. You are representatives of all who live in the city, not just a small group of bicyclists. Respectively submitted, Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: cdfarmen Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 3:57 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: CIP and Sidewalks Dear Council members, Over the past few years, I had given up on trying to get sidewalks on 80th Ave W north of 188th St SW. That was until I read the following comment in My Edmonds News made during a cuncil meeting discussion about adding more bike lanes throughout the city. “Basic mobility is a human right and designing only around vehicles is not sustainable for our climate or our safety or for just our future,” Distelhorst said. Does the city really think additional bike lanes are far more important than safe ADA-approved sidewalks for schoolchildren or disabled children? Would you want to walk this hill without a sidewalk? Do you think that you would want your children to walk to school in the mud that is created by rain on this steep slope during the winter? Especially with very limited sight distance. Is this an appropriate walkway for a disabled child who lives north of here? Is this a safe unimproved pathway for moms walking their children to Seaview Park to play or out for a walk with her child in a stroller? Since 2005 I made several attempts to get the city to install a sidewalk from 188th St SW northward 2 blocks to the intersection at 80th Ave W and 186th St SW and, to install a sidewalk from the intersection of 80th Ave w. and 184th St SW north 4 blocks to 180th St SW. Each time I was patronized by putting the sidewalk install projects on the CIP. But, as each year rolled around, the CIP review of the sidewalk project was never allowed to progress beyond the 6th year. And, finally, after a couple of years, it was dropped off the CIP entirely. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 37 The last time I was turned down, City Transportation Engineer, Bertrand Haus, explained to me that there were several reasons the sidewalk on 80th was not given any priority over other sidewalk plans. The overriding factor was it did not score high enough to be seriously considered. He said first of all, the beginning point of the sidewalk was too far from Seaview Elementary. Then he stated it was too long of a walkway project. And, the last reason I recall was that the north end of the proposed sidewalk was too far from the local community transit line stop in Perrinville. The reasons given are quite contrary to the sidewalks installed going south from 188th St SW on 80th. That sidewalk also starts too far from the school, it's a long 8 block sidewalk and there is not a Community Transit stop within the distance Mr. Haus cited to me. Really?? It's okay to have identical sidewalks south of 188th St SW but not north of 188th on 80th Ave W? I would think a proper sidewalk for school children should be of a higher city priority than extending bike lanes. Safe access needs to be provided to and from Seaview Elementary as well as Seaview Park's playground, tennis court, and ball field. And, what about the disabled child that lives in the area? The city is aware of this child and has so posted on 80th Ave W north of Seaview Park. The city's ADA Transition Plan clearly states the following: "In an effort to make the City of Edmond's public right-of-way facilities accessible to all, the City is engaged in developing an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan for the Public Right-of-Way. The ADA Transition Plan for the Right-of-Way demonstrates the City of Edmond's commitment to providing equal access to all of its public programs, services, facilities, and activities for citizens with disabilities. This plan is focused on pedestrian access routes within the right-of-way and includes sidewalks, curb ramps, street crossings, driveway crossings, rail crossings, hazards, and pedestrian-activated signal systems." It's about time the city takes the necessary steps to provide safe walkway routes along 80th Ave north of 188th St SW, a street which is very busy because of its access to Perrinville business district, the County Park trailhead, and the bus route for elementary, middle and high school students. And, it even gets busier as the major detour route when Olympic View Drive is closed to fallen trees or accidents. In my opinion and others in the Seaview area, sidewalks on 80th Ave should take precedence over extending bike routes in Edmonds. Thank you for seriously considering my comments. Duane Farmen Seaview area resident Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 38 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 39 From: Judith Works Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 12:55 PM To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Budget request I plead, beg or whatever that no more money be spent on bicycle lanes until the dangerous sidewalks in the city are repaired. No more orange paint please. We can't have a priority for the relatively few when the rest of us who walk are in danger. Thank you for your consideration Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 40 Judith Works From: finis tupper Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 10:22 AM To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Budget 2022 On October 16th, 2021, I noticed the Edmonds City Council Extended Agenda changed from the published and posted Public Hearing Notice of October 8th, 2021. Missing from the Extended Agenda were two items; Tuesday, November 23, 2021: Council Deliberations and Adoption of the 2022 City Budget and Tuesday, December 7th, 2021: Adoption of 2022 City Budget (if necessary). On October 19th, 2021, Edmonds citizens and City Council candidates for City Council Position #2 asked for explanation for these changes to the required Public Hearing Notice for the 2022 Edmonds Budget. Instead of a simple explanation for these changes, Administrative Services Director failed to provide any plausible reason for these changes to the Hearing schedule and Council deliberations. In fact to the contrary of his statements claiming honesty and being above approach, Dave Turley deceived the public and was dishonest to the core. On November 4, 2020, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas finally provided the true reason for the change was the Snohomish County Canvassing Board will be certifying the election results of the November 2, 2021 General Election on November 23, 2021. The reason for the change was the current appointed Councilmember Luke Distelhorst’s term will expired on afternoon of November 23, 2021. The newly elected City Councilmember Position #2 will be sworn into office and seated on council dais. According to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Luke Distelhorst is smarter and more knowledgeable. It’s too bad the majority of Edmonds voters do not agree this sentiment. Once again our City Attorney has failed the citizens of Edmonds. State law requires the Public Hearing Notice of the 2022 Edmonds Budget be approved by the legislative governing body not the City Council President, not the Administrative Services Director, not the City Clerk and definitely not the Mayor of Edmonds. RCW 35A.33.055. The Public Hearing Notice must be published twice and not three times October 8th, 15th & 22nd, 2020. RCW 35A.33.60. The Public Hearing Notice must be posted on per Edmonds City Code. ECC 1.03.020. The posting on City Hall front door on November 7th, 2021 is the original Public Hearing Notice not the modified October 15th, 2021 Public Hearing Notice. Thank you Councilmember Buckshnis for suggesting repeal of 2022 Budget once the newly elected Councilmembers are seated! Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 41 From: Kim Bayer Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 9:14 AM To: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Paine, Susan <Susan.Paine@edmondswa.gov>; LauraJohnson@edmondswa.gov; Distelhorst, Luke <Luke.Distelhorst@edmondswa.gov>; Buckshnis, Diane <Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov>; Olson, Vivian <Vivian.Olson@edmondswa.gov>; Johnson, Kristiana <kristiana.johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Monillas, Adrienne <Adrienne.Monillas@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Susan Paine tweet Mayor Nelson and Edmonds City Council ((bcc’d to others), I am reaching out to make you aware of a tweet (see below) that Susan Paine posted on 10/29/21 (3 days prior to the election). Is this how a City Council President should behave? Doesn’t this go against the Code of Conduct Susan is presiding over? She should be removed from overseeing the rewriting of our City Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics as she clearly does not follow them. Representing many Edmonds citizens, we are extremely disappointed in our council leadership. Shame on her for retweeting this trash talk about candidates running. She needs to be exposed for this. I sincerely hope this poor lack of judgement, along with so many other bad moves Susan has made in failing to serve the citizens of Edmonds, forces action to stop her from continuing these type of damaging actions; especially as your Council President. Kim Kim Bayer-Augustavo Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 42 From: Lynn Carpenter Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 4:29 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: No REDI position Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 9, 2021 Page 43 A short-term consultant, but not a full-time employee, is the best way to insure that our city hiring managers implement procedures that are equitable, diverse and inclusive. Lynn Carpenter Edmonds